·

·

Informal Soc-Com

Festinger, Leon 1950. Informal Social Communication. Psychological Review 57(5): 271-282.

The importance of strict theory in developing and guiding programs of research is becoming more and more recognized today. Yet there is considerable disagreement about exactly how strict and precise a theoretical formulation must be at various stages in the development of a body of knowledge. Certainly there are many who feel that some "theorizing" is too vague and indefinite to be of much use. It is also argued that such vague and broad "theorizing" may actually hinder the empirical development of an area of knowledge. (Festinger 1950: 271)
A timely sentiment, seeing as La Barre - contemporaneously - extolled on the virtue of theorization vs theory for the sake of theory.
It is probably correct that if a theory becomes too precise too early it can have tendencies to become sterile. It is also probably correct that if a theory stays too vague and ambiguous for too long it can be harmful in that nothing can be done to disprove or change it. This probably means that theories, when vague, should at least be stated in a form which makes the adding of precision possible as knowledge increases. (Festinger 1950: 271)
This (vagueness and ambiguity) is the problem with phatics. I'm not even sure if formulating "phatic studies" would rectify the situation, but an attempt must at least be made.
This program of research concerns itself with finding and explaining the facts concerning informal, spontaneous communication among persons and the consequences of the process of communication. It would seem that a better understanding of the dynamics of such communication would in turn lead to a better understanding of various kinds of group functioning. (Festinger 1950: 271)
I read "informal, spontaneous communication" as synonymous to phatic communion. The dynamics of it and its effects on group functioning are indeed pertinent problems.
One major source of forces to communicate is the pressure toward uniformity which may exist within a group. These are pressures which, for one reason or another, act toward making members of a group agree concerning some issue or conform with respect to some behavior pattern. It is stating the obvious, of course, to say that these pressures must be exerted by means of a process of communication among the members of the group. One must also specify the conditions under which such pressures toward uniformity arise, both on a conceptual and an operational level so that in any specific situation it is possible to say whether or not such pressures exist. (Festinger 1950: 272)
Always that emphasis on affirmation and consent, or in other words, agreement concerning some issue or conformance with respect to some behavior pattern.
1. Social reality: Opinions, attitudes, and beliefs which people hold must have some basis upon which tehy rest for their validity. (Festinger 1950: 272)
The firste major source of pressures toward uniformity is social reality, on which they base their opinions, attitudes, and beliefs. In a sense this definition of social reality amounts to common ground (or "background knowledge").
This continuum we may call a scale of degree of physical reality. At one end of this continuum, namely, complete dependence upon physical reality, we might have an example such as this: A person looking at a surface might think that the surface is fragile is unbreakable. He can very easily take a hammer, hit the surface, and quickly be convinced as to whether the opinion he holds is correct or incorrect. After he has broken the surface with a hammer it will probably make little dent upon his opinion if another person should tell him that the surface is unbreakable. It would thus seem that where there is a high degree of dependence upon physical reality for the subjective validity of one's beliefs or opinions the dependence upon other people for the confidence one has in these opinions or beliefs is very low.
At the other end of the continuum where the dependence upon physical reality is low or zero, we might have an example such as this: A person looking at the results of a national election feels that if the loser has won, things would be in some ways much better than they are. Upon what does the subjective validity of this belief depend? It depends to a large degree on whether or not other people share his opinion and feel the same way he does. If there are other people around him who believe the same thing, then his opinion is, to him, valid. If there are not others who believe the same thing, then his opinion is, in the same sense, not valid. Thus where the dependence upon physical reality is low the dependence upon social reality is correspondingly high. (Festinger 1950: 272)
This is extremely interesting, because I've never before met someone viewing physical and social reality as a continuum of (social) objects. It undermines dualism in this sphere quite well. It is also in some measure comparable to the topic of abstract and concrete reference. According to Buyssens (1988: 191), "concrete" even "characterizes a material object, something that can be perceived by at least one of our senses", while "abstract' refers to "constituents", e.g. shape, size, color, etc. on which we may have disagreements in the social dimension (what is "small" for me may be "big" for another). Moreover, "A concrete referent cannot be communicated; it must be known or present." (Buyssens 1988: 196)
It is not necessary for a Ku Klux Klanner that some northern liberal agree with him in his attitude toward Negroes, but it is eminently necessary that there be other people who also are Ku Klux Klanners and who do agree with him. The person who does not agree with him is seen as different from him and not an adequate referent for his opinion. The problem of independently defining which groups are and which groups are not appropriate reference groups for a particular individual and fora a particular opinion or attitude is a difficult one. (Festinger 1950: 273)
Finally (after god-knows-how-many-years of being aware of it) a quotable near-definition of a reference group.
From the preceding discussion it would seem that if a discrepancy in opinion, attitude, or belief exists among persons who are members of an appropriate reference group, forces to communicate will arise. It also follows that the less "physical reality" there is to validate the opinion or belief, the greater will be the importance of the social referent, the group, and the greater will be the forces to communicate. (Festinger 1950: 273)
"Social referent" sounds like a workable notion. So there are physical referents and social referents. Could there also be idiosyncratic referents, i.e. references - or perhaps allusions - to one's own previous semiotic activity (thinking, writing, etc.)? - Actually, that would basically be self-referentiality. Biological referents could probably be lumped in with physical referents, given common ground between the living and non-living. In any case, "social referent" (i.e. the group) seems like a cool notion.
Communications which arise from pressures toward uniformity in a group may be seen as "instrumental" communications. That is, the communication is not an end in itself but rather is a means by which the communicator hopes to influence the person he adresses in such a way as to reduce the discrepancy that exists between them. (Festinger 1950: 273)
This is what I would have called communization. But it's still pretty much in line with Morris's definition of communication, given that the means of reducing discrepancies involve achieving common signification.
Remembering that we are considering only communication that results from pressures toward uniformity, it is clear that if there are no discrepancies in opinion, that is, uniformity already exists in the group, there will be no forces to communicate. It would be plausible to expect the force to communicate to increase rapidly from zero as the state of affairs departs from uniformity. (Festinger 1950: 274)
This is a pretty significant caveat, since it's a special case of communication (in the group).
Cohesiveness of a group is here defined as the resultant of all the forces acting on the members to remain in the group. These forces may depend on the attractiveness or unattractiveness of either the prestige of the group, members in the group, or the activities in which the group engages. If the total attraction toward the group is zero, no forces to communicate should arise; the members may as easily leave the group as stay in it. As the forces to remain in the group increase (given perceived discrepancies in opinion and given a certain relevance of the item to the functioning of the group) the pressures to communicate will increase. (Festinger 1950: 274)
Cohesiveness sounds like one of those criteria that are relevant for any kind of discussion of groups but which is less prevalent these days since the term itself feels outdated. I may be wrong, though, it's just a feeling.
We have already stated in Hypothesis 1a that the pressure to communicate in general will increase as the perceived non-uniformity in the group increases. In addition the force to communicate will be strongest toward those whose opinions are most different from one's own and will, of course, be zero towards those in the group who at the time hold the same opinion as the communicator. In other words, people will tend to communicate to those within the group whose opinions are most different from their own. (Festinger 1950: 275)
In other words, dissidents are targeted for reeducation.
Infreuent contact in the ordinary course of events tends to erect restraints against communication. It is undoubtedly easier to communicate a given item to a person whom one sees frequently or to a person to whom one has communicated similar items in the past. The structuring of groups into hierarchies, social clusters, or the like, undoubtedly tends to restrict the amount and type of contact between members of certain different parts or levels of the group and laso undoubtedly restricts the content of the communication that goes on between such levels in the ordinary course of events. These restrictions erect restraints against certain types of communication. (Festinger 1950: 280)
A familiar sentiment from the intersection of communication routines and personal relationships.
EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION - An important variety of communications undoubtedly results from the existence of an emotional state in the communicator. The existence of joy, anger, hostility and the like seems to produce forces to communicate. It seems that communications resulting from the existence of an emotional state are consummatory rather than instrumental. (Festinger 1950: 280-281)
Unsurprisingly, just like the phatic function, consummatory communication is related to emotions. Define:consummatory - of, relating to, or being a response or act (as eating or copulating) that terminates a period of usually goal-directed behavior.
By a consummatory communication we mean one in which the reduction of the force to communicate occurs as a result of the expression and does not depend upon the effects it has on the recipient. Certainly in the case of such communications the reaction of the recipient may introduce new elements into the situation which will affect the force to communicate, but the essence of a consummatory communication is that the simple expression does reduce the force. (Festinger 1950: 281)
In this sense consummatory communication is in itself a releaser of tensions. (Compare to the factor of interpersonal tensions in Malinowski.)
Communications arising from the existence of emotional states. In this area data are almost completely lacking. Some theoretical distinctions were made and an experiment which is now in progress in this area was outlined. (Festinger 1950: 281)
The similarity with phatic communion is truly astounding.

Reading Fiordo


Fiordo, Richard 1978a. Kenneth Burke's Semiotic. Semiotica 23(1): 53-75.

Although articles, books, theses, and dissertations have been written on various aspects of the contribution of Kenneth Burke, nothing to date has been written on the semiotic of Burke. Works produced on Burke have focused on the rhetorical, critical, and dramatistic dimensions of his literary contributions. Some of the works on Burke, however, touch on his semiotic, but only obliquely. That is, an author writing on Burke might concern himself with Burke's theory of language, concept of identification, or notion of symbolic action. While any detailed discussion of Burke is apt to lead an author to encounter Burke's semiotic more or less indirectly, the discussion presented in this paper aims to encounter Burke's semiotic directly. (Fiordo 1978a: 53)
Quite commendable. I've been aware of Burke for a long time, but terms like "grammar" and "rhetoric" have kept me away from actually cracking his books. Will this paper change my mind?
As a symbol-using animal, man has symbolic forms, especially linguistic forms, and the cultural values implicit in the symbolic forms built into him. That is, man is not only symbol-using, but he is also symbol-used. Symbols infiltrate his being. Having this symbol-using nature, man inspirits nature with symbols of his own making and choosing. Thus, man's reality takes on a verbal quality. His language defines reality, for reality in itself is undefined. (Fiordo 1978a: 54)
This reminds me of Ernst Cassiser, another author whom I have not in fact read (much like Burke, at least not beyond a single paper). Their definition of human is so similar in fact, that an essay has been written about this very similarity.
Furthermore, man is incognizant of the degree to which his reality has this verbal flow to it. Burke points out:
Take away our books, and what little do we know about history, biography, even something so "down to earth" as the relative position of seas and continents? What is our "reality" for today (beyond the paper-this line of our own particular lives) but all this clutter of symbols about the past combined, with whatever things we know mainly through maps, magazines, newspapers, and the like about the present? [...] And however important to us is the tiny sliver of reality each of us has experienced firsthand, the whole overall "picture" is but a construct of our symbol systems. [...] And doubtless that's one reason why, though man is typically the symbol-using animal, he clings to a kind of naive verbal realism that refused to realize the full extent of the role played by symbolicity in his notions of reality. (1966a: 5)
In order to emphasize the extent to which symbols constitute man's reality, Burke adds that "ninety-nine percent, at least, of our reality is symbolic; the remainder is just a little line or string of personal experience". Hence, man's reality is almost totally pervaded with symbolism. (Fiordo 1978a: 54)
Nice metaphor. Communization would in this sense constitute an instance of paper-thin lines of particular lives intersecting. Note also that "symbols about the past", combined with "whatever things we know [...] about the present", and possibly "symbols about the future" would make for an interesting addition to the time-orientation discussion (involving Peirce, Jakobson, Laver, and Kampf).
As the inventor of the negative, man becomes the inventor of a peculiarly linguistic resource which he adds to the nonverbal or other-than-verbal dimension of reality. That is, the negative forms a "linguistic counterpart to the positive state of the nonverbal" and it grows out of the "relationship between the verbal and nonverbal realms" (Heath 1971: 78). For example, to ask for the opposite of being is to obtain the answer of non-being or nothingness, neither of which has a positive physical exemplar. Non-being is a negative language form and so is necessarily sheerly verbal. (Fiordo 1978a: 55)
This is the idea of nonverbal being incapable of expressing negation or non-being taken to the absolute extreme. I'd hold to a more "continous" view, since in the vocalization aspect, at least, language (use) is also positive. (In this sense phatic communication sensu La Barre is exactly the positive form of language.)
Through the negative, Burke demonstrates the need to 'discount" statements. Individuals must be aware, due to the ambiguity of language, that a statement about something implies all that the statement does not include. (Heath 1971: 85) (Fiordo 1978a: 56)
Add this to the long list of reflections on the weakly constitutive aspect (I really need a better label for it, and I think I found it in Ruesch & Bateson 1951, but I need to re-type the notes for it and they are many). My favourite such weakly constitutive aspect is E. R. Clay's: while sitting in my dorm room in front of my laptop I am not climbing the Alps.
Man is separated from his natural condition as a result of his symbolicity. That is, man's symbolicity permits him to create instruments through which he divides himself from his natural condition. In short, "men are not only in nature. The cultural accretions made possible by the language motive becomes a 'second nature' [...]" (Burke 1969a: 33) with them. Burke mentions a report in a newspaper concerning a breakdown of New York's lighting equipment. The report suggested that something so "natural as dark roadways at night was weirdly 'unnatural'" in the "second nature of the city" (Burke 1966a: 13). (Fiordo 1978a: 56)
In this sense it might be an interesting thought experiment to view the virtual environment of internet as man's third nature. (It might be an experiment with Peirce's phenomenological categories, e.g. man's Third nature.)
Man is only capable of making tools, but he is also capable of making tools for making tools. Similarly, man makes not only the tool of language, but he also makes language to make language, such as the language of symbolic logic. More narrowly, man creates definitions, and he creates definitions to make definitions, as when he creates the definition of the term 'not good' to make the definition of 'evil'. Any such use of words about words, as with dictionary definitions as well as the above examples, constitute the reflexive dimension of symbolism (Burke 1966a: 14). (Fiordo 1978a: 56-57)
I.e. metalanguage and metalingual operations (Jakobson), or metacommunication about codification (Ruesch & Bateson). "Reflexivity" is exactly the term I need to replace "introversive semiosis" in the Jakobsonian "duplex structure" approach to sign-functions.
With language, man divides from his animality and joins with his symbolicity. Hence, man seeks symbols of sexual release and symbols of satiation of hunger. Generally speaking, man becomes more concerned with what is meant by symbols of experience than with experience per se. (Fiordo 1978a: 57)
I don't see why this has to preclude nonlinguistic signs. In other words, in my opinion man is also more concerned with fantasy and imagination than with direct experience.
What the hierarchy implies, therefore, is not only order or rank but also the attitudes associated with the order or rank. Hierarchies imply rank order, and in so doing imply the attitudes and evaluations culturally invested in the hierarchies. (Fiordo 1978a: 58)
Charles Morris's examination of "the role symbol of the policeman" (in Grinker ed. 1956) is a good demonstration of this.
Burke adds that through the perfection principle man tries to get the world to be a particular pattern or form parallel to a perfect one existing in his mind. He also claims:
The principle of perfection is central to the nature of language as motive. The mere desire to name something by its "proper" name, or to speak a language in its distinctive ways is intrinsically "perfectionist". [...] The principle of perfection [...] figures in other notable ways as regards the genius of symbolism. A given terminology contains various implications, and there is a corresponding "perfectionist" tendency for men to attempt carrying out those implications. [...] There is a kind of "terministic compulsion" to carry out the implications of one's terminology [...] (Burke 1966a: 16-19)
In brief, Burke's entelechian principle explains why "individuals strive to fully realize the implications of any terministic, motivational, or philosophical system" (Heath 1971: 85). (Fiordo 1978a: 58)
Deep stuff. Makes me think of a kind of "nominalistic tendency" palpable in, for example, researchers studying what their name refers to; my favourite example being Marie Poland Fish's study titled Sonic Fishes of the Pacific (1948), where it is only surprising perhaps that it's not Sonic Fishes of the Polish Coast.
Other, and more commonplace examples, are the athlete trying to throw the perfect pitch or punch, the criminal trying to enact the perfect crime, and the student trying to write the perfect paper. Each agent tries to fulfill the perfectionist implications of the terminology he is working with. Thus, being a 'student' or 'fighter', or whatever, entails the terministic consequences of being them; that is, being the forenamed means facing up to the consequences of being them. (Fiordo 1978a: 58)
I see, "terministic screens" play on the word double meaning of terminal: a) the end or extremity of something; and b) prediction of slow, incurable death. In my case I really should reflect on the terministic consequences of being a semiotician.
Burke next experimentally affirms that things are the signs of words and traces through the implications of this proposition. He proposes that
language be viewed, not directly in terms of a word-thing relationship but roundabout, by thinking of speech as the "entitling" of complex nonverbal situations (somewhat as the title of a novel does not really name one object, but sums up the vast complexity of elements that compose the novel, giving it its character, essence, or general drift). (1966a: 361)
(Fiordo 1978a: 59)
Relevant for my theory of concourse (which, too, I need to rename). The line of thinking here parallels that of words labeling nonverbal phenomena (which may indeed involve a complex of nonverbal situations - I'm especially taken by the term complex in the noun form, since this is exactly the label I use in my concursive readings whenever the nonverbal situation cannot be boiled down to a single label).
Expanding on his notion of entitlement, Burke utilizes an analogy of an author entitling the chapters of his book and the book itself to communicate the meaning he has for his concept of entitlement. He explains:
Insofar as the work is properly formed, and insofar as your titles are accurate, they mark off a succession of essences. Each title would sum up the overall trend or spirit informing or infusing the range of details that are included under this head. And as we progressed from parts of chapters, to chapters, to groups of chapters, and so finally to an ultimate title of titles, we would have in effect a set of terms ever-widening in scope, until we got to the all-inclusive title that was technically the "god-term" for the whole congeries of words in their one particular order. (Burke 1966a: 370)
(Fiordo 1978a: 60)
I see this drama playing out frequently in terminological work. It's how I arrived at "phatics", for example, which subsumes communization, metacommunication, phatic communication, etc.
Also implicit in the notion of entitlement is the fact that a situation is summarized and entitled by an agent. Since the agent acts upon a situation by summarizing and entitling it, a transactional relation holds between the agent and the phenomenon through the agency of the title of which the phenomenon is a sign. Thus, the word dog means an entitling summarizing the transactional relationship between an agent or symbol-user and a situation or phenomenon in which the phenomenon of dog is signified by the word dog. (Fiordo 1978a: 62)
Implications for transcommunication: what if the projected AI in that equation will begin summarizing parts-of-speech in an artificial metalanguage? How much of it will be intertelligible to us humans?
Hence, terminology screens man from nonverbal reality. In screening him from a one-to-one correspondence with reality, it magnifies those areas of reality that the particular terms being used direct his attention to. (Fiordo 1978a: 62)
The linguistic component in sensory gating. (e.g. repeatedly uttering the word "keys" when one has lost his keys in order to direct his attention automatically to the item by activating background processes of object-detection in the brain.)
Third, Burke contends that "even if a terminology is a reflection of reality, its very nature as a terminology compells it to be a selection of reality. And to the extent that it is a selection of reality, the terminology must function also as a deflection of reality." The kind of deflection to which Burke refers concerns simply the fact that "any nomenclature necessarily directs the attention into some channels rather than others" (Burke 1966a: 45-46). (Fiordo 1978a: 63)
A linguistic component to the hodological (metaphorical, really) approach to channels. The terminology of sieving and serendipity could very well be complemented with the terminology of reflection, selection, and deflection. (In fact, since sieving implies something similar to terministic screens, I wouldn't be surprised if Kockelman had relied on Burke in some measure.)
As for the term reduction, Burke specified three kinds of reduction. The first is the reduction of the nonverbal to the verbal (or abstractions or generalizations of some sort or another). For example, the word manking neglects an infinite number of differences among humans in order to stress certain common properties which they possess. The many differences among humans are reduced to the term manking. (Fiordo 1978a: 64)
Indeed something quintessentially semiotic. I think I've read about this process in terms of condensation, but I'm not sure. It may touch upon cue reduction (and fixation), which is yet another topic (like sensory gating) that's quintessentially semiotic, but for which I have an odd, accidental label.
Since language is a species of action, Burke's methodology for analyzing language emphasizes action, rather than definition, information, or labelling. Burke seeks to determine what words do with man as well as what man does with words (Heath 1971: 66-67). (Fiordo 1978a: 65)
Approaching Malinowskian grounds. Since Burke also used the concept of context of situation, I wouldn't be all that surprised if he was familiar with Malinowski's work. But then again I recall him writing about Malinowski's phatic communion in the mid-1970s as if it were the first time he read him.
The distinctions of motion and action can be applied to actual words in the following manner. The word osmosis is a motion term, whereas the word ratiocinate is an action word. A word like breathe can be a motion or action term, contingent upon the context. For example, a person breathes (motion) in his sleep, and he also breathes (action) for fresh air in the morning. The distinction between motion and action terms are thus helpful in analyzing actual discourse to determine which dimension of meaning is intended. (Fiordo 1978a: 66)
Ratiocinate. That damn word. To reason, to carry on a process of reasoning. Verbal derivative of ratio, reason. Past participle of ratiocinari, to reckon, calculate, conclude. I think I finally found it in William Hamilton's lectures:: "Of the terms by which this process is denominated, Reasoning is a modification from the French raisonner, (and this a derivation from the Latin ratio), and corresponds to ratiocinatio, which has indeed been immediately transferred into our language under the form ratiocination. Ratiocination denotes properly the process, but improperly, also the product of reasoning; Ratiocinium marks exclusively the product." (Hamilton 1866: 278)
The third realm deals with words about words. Here is the realm of dictionaries, grammar, etymology, philology, literary criticism, rhetoric, poetics, dialectics - all what Burke would like to think of as the discipline of "Logology" (Burke 1961: 14). (Fiordo 1978a: 68)
Or what we would call metalanguage. Logo-logy basically amounts to the same indeed.
Burke entitles the ultimate god-term the "Title of Titles" because of its potential of "rising to ever and ever higher orders of generalization" (1961: 25). In other words, explanatory terms require generalized terms that summarize them; these in turn require generalizations, and so on, until one arrives at an overall term, a summarizing term, a "Title of Titles", in which al lexplanation is implicit (Burke 1943). An example of an ultimate term or Title of Titles might be the god-term capitalism among one people or socialism among another group of people. (Fiordo 1978a: 71)
The god-term in this sense, especially due to the illustrations of "capitalism" and "socialism", might be comparable to Morris's universal signs, and perhaps to Laclau's empty signifiers.
These five terms (act, scene, agent, agency, purpose) have been labeled the dramatistic pentad. [...] The pattern is incipiently a hexad when viewed in connection with the different but complementary analysis of attitude (as an ambiguous term for incipient action).
The pentad is Burke's paradigm for the study of signs. (Fiordo 1978a: 72)
Incipient: in an initial stage, beginning to happen or develop. Thus "attitude" is inflicted with the same quality of inchoateness as "affect".

Fiordo, Richard 1990. From sincerity to mendacity in personal rhetoric: A discrete look at continuous feelings. Semiotica 80(1): 89-107.

In another variation on Hayakawa's advice, Pearson reminds us that we do not 'communicate in a vacuum', but rather in a context. Context influences the 'levels of formality, the amount of preparation, the places that communication can occur, the topics which are appropriate, and the purposes it serves' (Pearson 1985: 17). In short, context and effects give us clues to meaning: sincere or mendacious. (Fiordo 1990: 90)
Relevant for phatics. Communization conditions the level of formality (by leveraging it) and the amount of necessary preparation (by negating its necessity), etc.
As for sincerity, I mean the quality of being in reality what something appears to be, of being genuine rather than feigned, of being truthful rather than dishonest, or of being free from hypocrisy. By mendacity, I mean the quality of being false, of telling untruths, or of lying (Webster 1984). (Fiordo 1990: 90)
An aspect of self-disclosure and intimacy?
My underlying concern in this paper is with personal rhetoric - specifically, rhetorical discourse that discloses personal thoughts, observations, actions, and feelings in degrees of sincerity. My interest in the rhetorical expression of personal thoughts, observations, actions, and feelings manifests itself with reference to sincerity. (Fiordo 1990: 90)
It certainly sounds like the content of phatic communion.
Given the psychological triad of cognition, psychomotor, and emotion (Martin 1983: 31), the classification of an instance of personal rhetoric according to its position on an S-M scale with reference to each dimension of the psychological triad has limits. To consider some rhetorical item as sincere or mendacious on the triune psychological dimensions means judging whether the cognitive disclosure leaned toward sincerity or mendacity, if it leaned at all; it means judging whether the psychomotor disclosure leaned one way or the other, if at all; and it means judging whether the emotional disclosure leaned one way or the other, if at all. (Fiordo 1990: 91)
"Psychomotor" is an odd equivalent of behaviour or action dimension. I know that "motor mimicry" is a relic of older physiology, and that Russians use "motor" for labeling body movement, but I've never met it in this classical triad. But then again the middle one is the most problematic - in the 19th Century (e.g. Alexander Bain) is was treated under "Volition", and even Peirce uses "energy".
Morris contributes a valuable criterion for judging the sincerity of a message through his notion of an expressive sign. A sign can be classified as expressive when 'the fact of its production is itself a sign to its interpreter of something about the producer of the sign'. (Fiordo 1990: 92-93)
The payoff. Morris's definition of the expressive sign is comparable to the phatic sign, specifically in the sense of "willingness to communicate" attributed to it in the cognitive approach to phatic interpretation (i.e. the pragmatic Relevance Theory of Žegarac and Clark).
Furthermore, the 'expressiveness is not a part of the signification of the sign in question but rather the signification of [...] a sign which consists in the fact that a sign is produced'. Concretely, people who talk oftentimes in the language of physics signal their 'interest in certain things rather than others' - in this case, physics (1946: 68). Likewise, people who frequently talk about dieting, sex, health, exercise, ailments, mental strife, teenagers, and so on function through such takl as expressive signs of thoughts, deeds, and feelings highly relevant to them in a favorable to unfavorable manner. 'The expressiveness of signs', according to Morris, 'is thus an additional property of signs over and beyond their sifgnification' (1946: 68). In rhetorical discourse, that we talk about something tells us as much as what we say about something (Fiordo 1977). (Fiordo 1990: 93)
Once again, the expressive and the phatic have an overlap.
For this paper, the contextual and effects criteria will be considered as part of the scaling for the discourse being perceived as a sincere or mendacious expression of the author's feelings on some matter. Since perceived sincerity (which may in fact be mendacity) seduces us into bogus friendships, dangerous loves, bankrupt partnerships, and sad marriages, the importance of knowing (more precisely, having grounds to have confidence) that others or ourselves are earnest may be tantamount to survival, happiness, and prosperity. As an effort to increase our confidence that the closing of 'sincerely yours' in some specific discourse expresses a nearly literal truth about feelings rather than a perfunctory aspect of protocol, several texts will be analyzed with the S-M scale in mind. (Fiordo 1990: 95)
Oh snap, we just got really phatic! A phatic utterance is exactly a perfunctory aspect of protocol, "perfunctory" meaning minimum of effort or reflection.
Or we may know ourselves and our feelings, be willing and fearless about expressing such feelings, yet be incapable of doing so at all or of doing so with aesthetic impact - that is, free of rampant cliche. Poets and rhetors may have a greater potential to communicate with sincerity, if they wish to do so; yet they may not choose to do so. (Fiordo 1990: 95)
Aesthetic impact is here understood as the opposite of cliche, that is, novelty, innovation, creativity.
Perhaps the latter is the more common group within humanity, stuck within the nauseous confines of hackneyed, babuistic, and psittaceous expressions. (Fiordo 1990: 95)
Psittaceous is "parrot-like", which I knew. But "babuism" is new for me - and I can't find a thorough explanation in any online dictionary besides it being derogatorily related to "Indian gentlemen" (e.g. the practices of Hindus who had only a slight English education, "babu" being a Hindi title equal to "Sir"). And "hackneyed" is just overused or trite.
Apart from the frequent occurrence of mendacity in the forms (sometimes approaching fiction) known as research grant applications, sabbatical leave proposals, grade justifications, television shows, annual review letters, textbooks, rejection as well as acceptance letters, letters of recommendation, policy statements, committee decisions, and the like - apart from these, mendacious rhetoric can be met with daily in editorials, commentaries, public relations announcements, news releases, letters to the editor, advertisements, poems, and similar rhetorical phenomena in our culture. Daily dealings with colleagues are also ripe with mendacity. In short, the list is too long. And as Big Daddy, Tartuffe, and numerous others from the literary gospels would suggest, to be sincere is an existential struggle. (Fiordo 1990: 103)
In one paragraph the whole of academia is lit up.
Yet, because a truth betrayed is significant to us, distinguishing sincerity from mendacity is crucial to us. The people who insincerely tell us our painting or poem is lovely, our appearance is breathtaking, our absence is missed, and the like may have immediate value to us as mendacious sweet flatterers. When we need honest and reliable reactions, however, we are likely to seek out the most sincere in our humble ranks. (Fiordo 1990: 103)
Phatic exchanges are rife with mendacity.

Fiordo, Richard 2009. Symbolic Mediation of Experience, Communication, and General Semantics: In Praise of Clearing Mediated Clouds. ETC: A Review of General Semantics 142-161.

In modern societies, communication media, mass and high-tech or personal and low-tech, provide a means for nearly endless content to be transacted among human beings through pertaps infinite symbol systems. If ecology deals with organisms interacting with environments, media ecology deals with humans interacting through diverse symbolically mediated environments with high-tech, low-tech, mass, or personal media. A mediated environment may be the norm for human interaction in societies incorporating mass and computer mediated communication. Just as there can be crises in the ecology, there can be crises in the media ecology. Hopefully, both crises can be monitored. (Fiordo 2009: 142)
"Transacted" is here used in the sense in which we means "transcommunication" (i.e. communicative transactions through computer media, rather than transactions of the service encounter type).
In related terms, Postman (1979) views the printed word, the alphabet, and television images as "environments - like language itself, symbolic environments - within which we discover, fashion, and express or humanity in particular ways" (p. 186). (Fiordo 2009: 143)
The current issue of Networked Knowledge on "affective media" focuses on some of the humane aspect found in such environments.
Telecommunication and computer-mediated technologies are advancing rapidly (Barnes, 2003). Media may become our ecology more than nature, and illusions of reality may replace reality. In Tokyo and Nagasaki, travelers view enormous electronic video units in public places covering topics from pop singers to tender shots of shoreline or grazing wildlife. Symbolized reality, not the reality itself, is available through media. (Fiordo 2009: 144)
Score for the "Third nature" proposed somewhere above.
In fact, journalism involves being truthful to its readers and being truthful involves providing verified or verifiable content (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2001: 6). To fail to ground public statements in what is true and observed is to devolve from journalism to fiction or propaganda. (Fiordo 2009: 144)
That's a pretty bold statement, considering how journalists nowadays exclaim that objectivity in journalism is an unachievable or unrealistic goal to begin with. E.g. ""Objectivity" is a silly thing to strive for."
Although human life is symbolically mediated with or without mass media, with mass media permeating our ecology, littel is left to so-called direct experience. Kenneth Burke (1973) made the point in person that our symbol-free zones as humans might constitute one percent of our experience. However, Burke never declared that we cannot minimize or eliminate electronic and other forms of mediated communication. He knew too much about the lives of the mystical, the reclusive, and the imprisoned to make such a statement (Burke, 1968). To block ourselves from mass mediated realities poses a difficult but attainable goal. Indeed, even to aspire to mass media minimalism poses a challenge. Mass media content leaks into our lives like outside air into homes that cannot be hermetically sealed. (Fiordo 2009: 146)
With new technologies this is increasingly so. Although I would hold that it is still possible to become a recluse in this new landscape. One only needs to unplug and move somewhere where there aren't (m)any self-luminous screens.
Where an empirical semiotics overlaps with general semantics, we may have a common ground for understanding through the senses (or extensions of the senses) available through technologies. In the current North American media mix, broadcasters reiterate stories on global warming with the admonishment that human society is bringing on its own woes. Most of us have not walked on the polar caps, nor presumably have most of those broadcasting the stories. We rely on (1) mediated reports from scientists as carriedin learned journals, (2) on mass media reporters, or (3) on a challenging blend of both views. Media professionals vary tremendously in the sincerity of their efforts to make sense. Note well that media professionals are not under assault here. The integrity of some journalists is exemplary. What they declare may, given counterevidence, be critically assessed and should be (Cohen, 1995). Truth as reported need not follow from the sincerity of the reporter. Media consumers must watch for errors. (Fiordo 2009: 147)
2009 was really a different time. By now we experience the weather becoming weirder and weirder more directly, for example by having what used to be April weather in December. This discussion touches upon the topic of "images of climate change" (Ballantyne et al. 2016).
Applied to language, many of our English words used in daily lives are remnants from a comparatively unscientific time (Bois, 1969, pp. 43-45). As we become conscious of the limitations of our pre-scientific inherited language and make reasonable adjustments to it, we live intelligently with its distortions as we do when we know the Mercator projection distorts Earth's geography. (Fiordo 2009: 150)
A problem to overcome with the work of definition. E.g. Morris's attempt to surpass the unscientific term, "meaning".

Fiordo, Richard 2011. Contributions to General Semantics from Charles Morris: An Abstract. ETC: A Review of General Semantics 68(2): 156-177.

"When I asked Einstein whether he could generalize his theory of relativity to metaphysics," noted Charles Morris to me in a face-to-face interview on August 18, 1973, "Einstein reminded me he was but a physicst" (Fiordo, 1973). (Fiordo 2011: 156)
Morris interviewed Einstein, and Fiordo interviewed Morris. Kinda reminds me of Kiwa's recent Facebook post, that he has now shaken the hand of a man who shook the hand of Yuri Gagarin.
Metaphysics begins at the outer limits of science; it boldly extends science in the form of physics, behaviorism, etc., into areas where no methodological science could venture, namely, metaphysics. Morris integrates empirical and behavioral dimensions in his semiotic philosophy. Although a number of rhetorical (Burke, 1966; Toulmin, 1958; Foucault, 1980) and semiotic (Eco, 1976; Ogden & Richards, 1923; Leeds-Hurwitz, 1993; Barthes, 1968; Derrida, 1988; Sebeok, 1976) theorists have written on matters relevant to general semantics, Morris's philosophy, particularly his semiotic, constitutes the focus in this study because of its scientific inclination toward extensionality and sanity. (Fiordo 2011: 158)
The behavioral dimension is manifest in his "behaviorism", but I'm not sure where Morris's empiricism is, because my favourite illustrations in Signs, Language, and Behavior are basically anecdotes.
Because of spatial limits, much of Morris' sophisticated thought has to be reduced and simplified - hopefully not beyond recognition by other scholars of Morris. General semantics and the philosophy of Morris are too complex and sophisticated to be confined to this relatively short paper. (Fiordo 2011: 158)
Neither am I aware of any other scholars of Morris. At least not active ones. In fact, now that I search EBSCO, between 2010 and current year, you can find this paper, an encyclopedia entry about Charles Morris by Susan Petrilli, and... more papers by Petrilli that at least mention Morris. I take it, then that Susan Petrilli is a scholar of Morris.
In a panoramic sense, through the phrase objective relativism, Morris entitled his philosophy to the best of his ability, yet declared that he entitled it due to pressure from scholars and students. He would rather not have named his philosophy (Fiordo, 1977). While Morris does not provide a precise definition, he explains the title in his writings. After considering the terms perspectivism and contextualism, he settled on objective relativism to name a pluralistic philosophy that links itself "in close relation to the results and the methods of science" (Morris, 1948, pp. 129-130). (Fiordo 2011: 159)
I am not all that surprised. His interests were varied, so it would have been perhaps even improper to subsume all of his work under a singular title.
If the individual became a part of a new situation and perspectives, new features of this person's personality would emerge. For example, if a woman from a small town in North Dakota entered Fordham University in New York City, aspects of her personality will influence her reactions within this university community, and aspects of her personality will surface because of her "interactions with others in the university." With every other social situation she experiences, "this process wil continue" and likewise for "every other person with whom the [woman] interacts in the small town or in the university" (Morris, 1970b, pp. 129-130). (Fiordo 2011: 160)
The looking glass self, with updated phraseology.
Fallibilism is a critical doctrine adhered to by Morris, Charles Sanders Peirce, John Dewey, and other pragmatists (Morris, 1934; Morris, 1970a; Morris, 1970b). With some risk, since it is intended to be critical of all positions including its own, it might be seen as functioning like pancritical rationalism (Bartley, 1990). Of course, because, pancritical rationalism is a term made possible through high-level abstracting, it should be understood cautiosly here in a context close to its etymological meaning of "being critical, potentially, of everything." Since fallibilism constitutes the perspective that any claim to information and knotledge may be faulty, inquiry must incorporate detachment. From a pragmatic point of view, although possible, it is not likely that an entire system of beliefs will fail all at once. Usually, one or several premises or facts may be challenged at a time and may sustain the rigor of a critical assault. However, of the beliefs challenged, while one may disintegrate under scritiny, others may survive criticism. (Fiordo 2011: 163)
That "inquiry must incorporate detachment" is the feature I find most relevant in this. I like to imagine that my blogging-type academic research comes with a tint of detachment, because I'm not obligated to claim anything as my own - all quotes are cited, and even my own reactions are transitory, meant as anchors for finding relevant quotes later on, and understanding my reason for including the quote.
After reflection over a number of years, believing that the technique and the technology were still not where they needed to be to map cognitive space and activity, Morris took refuge once again in his hardcore base in a behavioral semiotic. While he yearned to map the psychological interior, he concluded that the scientific technology was not yet there to do so validly and reliably. For the time being, human researchers would have to be patient until a technology for probing mental imagery exists. Philosophical speculation on what is going on in the "black box" (or human mind) would be all that is currently possible. (Fiordo 2011: 166)
And we're still patiently waiting for the BRAIN project to bear fruits.
As one example, if a congregation is pleased with the sermons of an evangelist, a behavioral semiotic tries to locate or invent behavioral measures of the congregation's appreciation: attendance at sermons, donations, recorded endorsements of the evangelist, purchase of religious tapes, etc. A behavioral semiotic, in general semantic terms, contributes to the attainment of low levels of abstraction without denying the potential value of high levels of abstraction. As another example, without knowing another's language, to say that person is Spanish, "Que te diviertas!" (Have fun!), and to get a reply in Spanish like "Por que no?" (Why not?) means the signs meant something to that message receiver. Although there are other inferences that can be drawn, a blank stare with no feedback wight mean the words were not understood because there was no verbal behavior resulting from the verbal stimulus. Human organisms interact with, act on, and relate to physical, semiotic, and verbal environments. (Fiordo 2011: 168)
I am reminded of Austin's phatic acts, e.g. uttering words in a foreign language that one assumes mean something.
When an individual visits Oslo the most and Kathmandu the least, preferential behavior for Oslo emerges also through frequency. Instead of talking about value at a high level of abstraction, value becomes grounded in behavior that demonstrates a preference for one choice over another. (Fiordo 2011: 169)
Likewise I sense a possible connection with phaticity in the sense that in phatic communication the semantic content is "a high level of abstraction" perhaps even out of reach, but the relatively low level of abstraction, focusing on the fact of communication itself, is more palpable.
When special functions of language are required, special forms of discourse are necessary. Humanity evolved specialized forms of discourse from the general language - the specialized discourse being used to perform special tasks as efficiently as possible (Fiordo, 1977; Morris, 1955). Korzybski's (2000) view that ordinary language needs special linguistic and punctuation improvements propounds similar warnings and makes similar pronouncements. The special language described and endorsed by Morris and Korzybski suggest sublanguages or languages purposefully restricted to a special area - such as, science, poetry, or HCI (human-computer interaction). (Fiordo 2011: 170)
Much like Jakobson, who attributed different linguistic functions to different subcodes of language.
Appraisive-valuative discourse is associated with poetry and poetic language. Embodying metaphor, this type of discourse acknowledges the designative mode but employs words that are primarily appraisive in mode (Fiordo, 1977, p. 107) and strives to accord preferential status to the "discourse itself rather than to what is designated." The emphasis in this specilaized use of language manifests itself in the poetic or specifically in poetry, where the interest of persons in this way signs are utilized may become "the prominent interest - so much so that such persons may wish to limit poetic discourse to appraisive discourse which aims to induce approval of the discourse itself" (Morris, 1955, pp. 136-137). (Fiordo 2011: 173)
It really is like reading Roman Jakobson. And I have my own "conspiracy theory" of why that may be so, involving Morris travelling to Poland during his 1934 sabbatical and maybe meeting Jan Mukarovsky at a conference in Germany. (I've yet to trace this lead further than downloading the conference report.)

Fiordo, Richard 2012. General Semantics, Science, and Medicine: A Quality Approach. ETC: A Review of General Semantics 69(4): 364-381.

Morris (1938) and other learned scholars tried to unify the sciences. To a degree, through a project that culminated in a series of volumes entitled the International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, they succeeded in propounding this noble effort. In calling attention to features common to the natural and social sciences, some unification occurred by covering such topics as probability, logic, and semiotics - all of which play a role in the cumulative and progressive nature of the diverse disciplines of science. Overall, the project's reach exceeded its grasp. While the effort enjoyed headway, it did not succeed in its stupendous objective. (Fiordo 2012: 366)
I thought that the Unified Science movement came to a halt due to political reasons. At least Anti Randviir ("On spatiality in Tartu-Moscow cultural semiotics", 2007: 149) writes that TMS was "one of the first cases of transdisciplinarity in the modern era after the (politically and militarily forced) slow death of the movement towards the Unified Science in the beginning of the 20th century."
Much traditional and conventional advice on making assumptions borders on being inane. The prescription to make no assumptions is impractical and unworkable. This clichéd and profane adage needs to be repaired: "When you make assumptions, you make an ass of you and me." As Kodish and Kodish (2001) admonish, no one "can live free of assumptions, premises, inferences, generalizations, etc." (p. 32). However, they also argue that when people "become aware of how assumptions can lead them astray they may decide not to make assumptions." Yet, human beings cannot not assume: "Human behavior is driven by assumptions." Consequences, subsequently, follow assumptions (Levinson, 2007). (Fiordo 2012: 367)
Concerning cultural techniques, phaticity falls in the category of an assumption before being explicated by some term or other (be it small talk, or phatic talk, or whatever).
Allness refers to the human inabality to ever "say all there is to say about anything - at least not logically" (DeVito, 2011). When a communicator assumes that everything that can be said has been said, that person misevaluates the situation and commits the fallacy of allness. Acknowledging allness is especially relevant since it allows communicators to "recognize that there is more to learn, more to see, and more to hear." All cannot be said, practically speaking. Allness helps people recognize complexity. General semantics recommends an antidote to allness. To avoid allness, it is wise to "end each statement, sometimes verbally but always mentally, with an 'etc.' (et cetera) - a reminder that there is more to learn, know, and say: that every statement is inevitably incomplete" (p. 130). (Fiordo 2012: 369)
Huh. So this allness we keep hearing about in all these papers in actually pretty close to fallibilism. The "inevitable incomplete[ness]" of statements is pretty much at the heart of Peirce's semiosis - with rarely anything being final.
Hayakawa (1990) explained that judgments involve snarls and purrs through words and symbols about a communicator's expression of approval or disapproval of people, objects, or events. Judgments express the attitude and evaluation of the source of a message to some occurrence. A judgment involves the use of words that snarl or purr at someone or something. A snarl would express, of course, a negative appraisal while a purr would express, of course, a positive appraisal. (Fiordo 2012: 370-371)
This is one of the expressive functions outlined by Ogden and Richards, which is markedly different from Jakobson's emotive function, since it's not as much about the sender's emotional state as it is exactly about attitude towards the referent (people, objects, or events).
From a practical point of view in the here and now, it seems like folly to rediscover what already has volumes of research written and recorded on it and decades of research established and growing. (Fiordo 2012: 377)
This is pretty much the situation in "phatic studies": volumes of research has been written and recorded, and decades of research established and growing, but the problem is that much of this research is disjointed, with various researchers operating with different conceptions of phaticity, almost all seemingly ignorant that similar work is being conducted in other, perhaps unconnected, fields. What we aim to do is akin to the unified science motive of bringing researchers, or if not people themselves then at least their ideas, conceptions, definitions, and results, together. Because as it stands it looks like every newcomer "discovers" phatic communication all new, unaware that there are (by my current count) at least 300 publications on the subject (in actual fact there may be thousands, but 300 I've managed to find and download thus far).
In psychiatry, the fact of homosexuality was classified in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) as a disease until a vote, not scientific research, removed its classification as a disease. (Fiordo 2012: 378)
This may be a decisive (political) issue, but what I've heard is that it was removed from DSM exactly because there wasn't any scientific proof that it is a disease.

Fiordo, Richard 2013. Midlevel Abstracting: An Undeserved Zone of General Semantics. ETC: A Review of General Semantics 70(2): 82-110.

[...] Abraham Lincoln recollects that "when a mere child, I used to get irritated where anyone talked to me in a way I could not understand." Although Lincoln never "got angry at anything else," as he puts it, a failure to understand "always disturbed my temper; and has ever since." He recalls going to his "little bedroom, after hearing the neighbors talk of an evening with my father, and spending no small part of the night [...] trying to make out what was the exact meaning of some of their, to me, dark sayings." Lincoln adds that he could not sleep when "I got on such a hunt for an idea until I had caught it." He concludes by saying this hunt for an idea "was a kind of passion with me, and it has stuck by me" (p. 42).
In his plain brilliance, Lincoln captures the interest of this study in general semantics - an attempt to identify and elaborate the notion of midlevel abstracting. (Fiordo 2013: 82)
Curiously, Austin's "phatic acts" are midlevel between phonetic and rhetic, and concern "saying something", although it's not yet clear (or rhematic, in Peircean terms) what is being said.
The one significant feature to be emphasized here involves a consciousness of the process of abstraction. Moving between lower and higher levels of abstraction consciously produces in humanity the opportunities to operate sanely instead of pathologically. Without "consciousness of abstracting," human beings run pathological risks. When abstracting becomes a conscious effort, human language use becomes "fundamentally changed in a beneficial way" (p. 37). (Fiordo 2013: 83)
I tend to fall in the Sapirian camp of considering consciousness of semiotic processes a hindrance rather than a necessity.
Two book titles can provide immediate examples of the unproblematic utility, generally speaking, of midlevel abstraction: Sensible Thinking for Turbulent Times (Levinson, 2006) and Misunderstanding the Internet (Curran, Fenton, and Freedman, 2012). Both titles make midlevel abstraction sense without burdening the interpreter with unnecessary details. Of course, reading the books would allow the specific details to become apparent. (Fiordo 2013: 87)
Cool titles. But I have a feeling as if midlevel abstracting in this sense concerns the almost-but-not-really metaphorical use of language evident in the titles of contemporary authors. I.e. compared to the low-level titles of the 1970s, like "A comparison of the distributional and sequential structures of interaction in high and low consensus groups" (Saine * Bock 1973), contemporary authors tend to create titles with something "almost poetic" followed by a subtitle of keywords, e.g. "The New Russian Vocative: Synchrony, Diachrony, Typology" (Andersen 2012), or, to take a more edgy example: "Hearing What We See: Censoring "Nigga," Vernaculars, and African Agentic Subjects" (Nguyen 2013).
Gauged by Hayakawa's (1990; 1940) ladder of abstraction, midlevel abstracting would typically occur between low-level terms like "Roxy the Bull Terrier at 101 Lombard Street in San Francisco, California is ill" and high-level terms like "Sentient beings suffer." Midlevel terms tend to be in the range of terms like dog, animal, pet, exense, and so on. (Fiordo 2013: 87-88)
Okay, well, that makes sense. But then again it's culturally relative. Maybe "sentient beings suffer" is a low-level abstraction for a Buddhist monk?
Because illusions of understanding may result through midlevel language, midlevel language must be challenged repeatedly for problematic referents - referents that masquerade as shared meanings when they are not. Distinguishing problematic from unproblematic assumptions about terms having shared meaning must be proactive in any semantic situation (Morris, 1964; Fiordo, 2011). (Fiordo 2013: 88)
This is a problem we have with "phatic". It's intuitive enough to grasp when given illustrations, but when applied in theoretical models it tends to clutter with idiosyncracies.
To reaffirm the difficulty of proceeding with dead-level abstracting, imagine a hundred page book written in discourse exclusively at high-level or low-level of abstraction. The punishment to the reader would be severe, yet the reader would likely identify that one level of discourse was too vague and the other too particular for extended reading. Both extremes of discourse would likely become obstacles to their own comprehension and acceptance. (Fiordo 2013: 89)
That's actually I intend to do at some point. I have an alter ego who theorizes artificial intelligence, and she does this by picking up the most obtuse jargon from abstracts of philosophy papers, and writes basically an artistic text comprised of sentences that are on such a high level of abstraction that not a single sentence can be fully understood without googling and carefully considering each and every term. #plagiosystems
The midlevel discourse relies heavily on context and creates an impression of oneness and clarity between sender and receiver, especially when the language used is actually too abstract to warrant a confidence in the specificty of the language used. To add to the complication of midlevel language use, one can read or listen to it at length without becoming disturbed since it appears to be the norm in much discourse from politics, religion, journalism, education, and social life. (Fiordo 2013: 90)
An aspect to add to the linguistic treatment of communization. (Specifically this concerns the very general "linguistic community" issue.)
Also, a clever speaker of, say, Spanish might check an English speaker's capacity in Spanish by asking the Anglophone to answer a leading queston posed in Spanish. For example, to ask, "Come esta?" in Spanish translates into English as "How are you?" To see whether a suitable response follows, if the English speaker responds with legitimate bafflement, the Spanish questioner might determine that the Anglophone does not comprehend Spanish. If the person questioned responds in Spanish, the questioner confirms the listener has some knowledge of Spanish. (Fiordo 2013: 92)
Exactly the phatic function of greetings, according to Malinowski. If you elucidate the language spoken by a stranger you can decide whether you can communicate, and furthermore, perhaps by diction or accent, you can decide whether you want to communicate.
The assumption that the language a source uses has a shared meaning with the interpreter must be challenged almost constantly until sufficiently clear referents are established and misunderstanding is reduced or eliminated (Richards, 1936) - that is, until there is a commonness of meaning, a meeting of the minds, communication (Morris, 1964; Fiordo, 1977). As a newsflash from the ancient Greek past, Plato holds that there is unity and there is division (Taylor, 1960). If a false unity of meaning between two communicators is suspected, the discourse critic must deconstruct or destroy - that is, divide from - the phoniness of oneness. (Fiordo 2013: 95-96)
Unity and division, or communization and differentiation. Note that if communication is a meeting of the minds then phatic communion is a meeting of persons (in purely social discourse).
The terminological facade of a common meaning has to be challenged to disambiguate interpreter differences. If not substantiated, the fantasy of necessarily shared meanings among receivers has to be destroyed. (Fiordo 2013: 104)
Again, this is the case with "phatic", which seems to have a unitary denotation on the surface but actual uses show a marked variation in signification.

Fiordo, Richard 1978b. League's Projection. Semiotica 24(3): 371-379.

The reader who is interested in Eastern and Western thought and who is interested in psycholinguistics, semantics, linguistics, communication, psychology, therapy, religion, or philosophy will find a wealth of information in Richard League's insightful book entitled Psycholinguistic Matrices (1977). League presents the bold and daring thesis that the mind and universe are parallel, and he offers precies, scientific support for this thesis and its corollaries through statistical testing and analysis. Dr. League details a microscopic view of a macroscopic subject - psycholinguistic matrices. (Fiordo 1978b: 371)
I read this book on the third month into my first semester in semiotics, and compared to the books I was reading at the time (I read a lot in that November) I found it excruciatingly boring. But I've met discussion of it elsewhere as well, and this is the second time that I'm thinking about giving it another spin.
League feels that a new reconciliation is beginning to take place between science and the arts, and that consciousness is the bold new unifying conception. Consciousness, League believes, is a concept capable of exciting in us both the courage and the hope of reuniting the interests of the creative scientist and artist (pp. 136-137). Since the symbol is the center of consciousness and is the medium for the evolution of its higher manifestations in the universe, the symbol takes on the same crucial type of importance to League as it does to Charles Morris (1964), George Mead (1934), and Charles Peirce (1958). (Fiordo 1978b: 371-372)
I'm not sure if science and art have ever been in that disjointed, at least in semiotics (considering, for example, that many 19th century semioticians - especially in central and eastern Europe - were simultaneously aestheticians).
Defining language as "a method for the diffusion of culturally shared experience between and among the members of the linguistic group" (p. 23), League adds that language also helps to organize and transmit the thought of unique and creative thinkers to people everywhere. The communication of the unique thoughts to the mass of humanity affects billions of lives through release of the physical and psychic forces of the universe (pp. 23-24). (Fiordo 1978b: 373)
Oh snap, this is a good observation for playing around with the concepts of communication and communization. Also, consider Ruesch/Bates on the assumption that the unique cannot be communicated (only that which repeats, can), which is a corollary to the discussion on private signs.
Furthermore, League holds that "as reflected in the inner cosmos of man (the microcosm), linguistic symbolism is profoundly iconic with the outer universe (the macrocosm)" (p. 23). Pointing to Herocleitos of Ephesos as a thinker deeply concerned with the underlying identity of apparent opposites - in this case, the "profound bipolar oneness of the inner and outer universes" (or consciousness and the outer universe) - League emphasizes that the latest scientific discoveries continue to support this hypothesis (p. 23). (Fiordo 1978b: 373)
Something that philosophers even today are drawn to (even Joe is currently playing around with such stuff). To me it reminds of Charles Scherrington, whose paper on proprioception I feel I should re-read.
In this first chapter, the author sketches the highlights of the thought of George Mead, Charles Morris, and Charles Osgood. Describing Mead's significant symbol as a "sign that elicits the same meaning or disposition in the interpreter that it has in the individual making the sign", League reminds us that Mead maintained that the human mind, the individual self, and human society evolved simultaneously and integrally with the significant symbol (p. 24). (Fiordo 1978b: 373)
Or, as Joe puts it, "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny". For my purposes the "disposition" that is being elicited has profound implications for a theory of communization. Specifically, that dispositions may be pre-existing (or pre-conditioned, rather).
A general hypothesis permits the researcher to test "both ends and the middle and whatever is in between"; a testable hypothesis prevents the development of beautiful yet inscrutable paradigms; an improbable hypothesis emerges from an original and creative insight (p. 38). (Fiordo 1978b: 374)
Almost exactly the words that I have used to critique some "Frenchy" semioticians who are loquacious but whose words signify nothing. I have a feeling that "beautiful yet inscrutable" is a phrase that may follow me much like Langer's "more hope and fanfare than actual achievement".
In discussing cross-linguistic satiation, League distinguishes two types of bilingual people: a compound bilingual person, who learns two languages simultaneously in the same environment, and a coordinate bilingual person, who learns two languages at different times in separate environments (p. 49). (Fiordo 1978b: 375)
Possible synonyms for treating synchronic and diachronic metacommunication.

Fiordo, Richard 1986. Tales from the Smokehouse: A rhetorical inquiry into erotic didactics. Semiotica 60(1): 1-28.

As far as Morris is concerned, his philosophy of objective relativism allows us to examine the personnae from the Tales in terms of the 'perspectives (or systems) of which he was and is a member' (Morris 1970b: 129) as well as the potentially 'new features' which would 'emerge' if thi sperson entered into a novel system (1970b: 130). In short, we will cover the problem that whatever a person is in one system - cultural or whatever - affects what that person is in another system (1970b: 128-129). In short, the right moral act is 'neither subjective caprice nor a timeless essence' because 'its universality is a social universality' (Morris 1934c: xxxiii). (Fiordo 1986: 4)
The emergent self.
With reference to the 'basic components of human valuing' as symbolized, Morris lists dependence, dominance, and detachment. (Fiordo 1986: 4)
Are these comparable to Ruesch's approach, preservation, and detachment?
Dependence involves 'easy compliance with the world'. A person depends on and is receptive to the physical and social world, from which this person 'wishes sustenance, wishes a dependable world'. Dominance includes the need to have 'a controllable world, a world in which effort is efficacious'. The value is for' power over persons and things, the excitement of overcoming'. And detachment deals with 'movement away from excessive external stimulation' and 'toward the inner [person]'. It values 'awareness of oneself', the 'world at a distance', and living with 'heightened consciousness' (Morris 1956: 27-28). (Fiordo 1986: 4-5)
I think a comparison might actually be possible, if "compliance" and "efficacy of effort" are moulded to suit co-operation rather than dominance.
The stories are clearly within didactics in that they instruct us in one direction rather than another. (Fiordo 1986: 5)
A somewhat loose definition of didactics.
According to Morris, incitive discourse aims to 'direct behavior into definite channels'; it does not aim 'merely to give information or to determine the preferential status of something or other' (Morris 1955: 102). (Fiordo 1986: 7)
Now I have to consult "incitive" in Morris's typology, because it sounds a bit like what Kockelman and some others are writing about these days. In other words, it concerns the conjunction between phatic+conative, or "hodology" in general.
He once saw his oldest daughter naked in the 'cool waters of the lake'. Realizing she was ready for a man, Nababajou decided that 'truly no man deserves her more than I' (1976: 22). (Fiordo 1986: 11)
The mindset of a one Donald Trump.
After this brief pleasure, due to continued tortuous dreams, Short Arrow became 'small and tired all the time' (1976: 45) and made 'both of them unhappy and frustrated'. He saves their relationship when, 'in desperation', he seeks the advice of Red Stones, the medicine man, and tells him that 'no matter how great a man's power is it soon wears out when in contact with a woman'. (Fiordo 1986: 16)
That's sexist, yo!

Fiordo, Richard 1989. The semiotic SEA of questioning. Semiotica 73(1): 25-41.

The acronym SEA derives from the words suggestion, expectation, and assumption - features inherent in the formulation of any particular question in any inter vivos context. The terms are borrowed from Richardson et al.'s (1965) classic text on interviewing and questioning becaues of their descriptive power over the traditional terms. Questions that suggest, expect, and assume much would be termed high SEA questions rather than loaded questions; questions that suggest, expect, and assume little would be termed low SEA questions rather than direct questions. Figuratively, when questions are in high SEA, someone is in deep water. Direct, leading, and loaded questions can be translated imprecisely into and interchanged imprecisely with low, medium, and high SEA questions. (Fiordo 1989: 26)
Thus far makes sense. I wonder if SEA is in any way comparable to Ruesch's response, cue, and reward.
In Plato's Apology (in Tredennick 1959: 55), Socrates asks Meletus, 'Is it not true that wicked people have a bad effect upon those with whom they are in the closest contact, and that good people have a good effect?' and 'Is there anyone who prefers to be harmed rather than benefited by his associates?' (Fiordo 1989: 27)
I recall a social psychological study about how being around intelligent people may rub off on you. The company you keep, as it turns out, does have an effect on you. Not all that surprising to common sense, but there may be interesting research on the subject to look into.
Whether analyzing or generating interrogative discourse, the means offered in this paper are but heuristic and operational. Lacking the formal sophistication of symbolic logic as well as the invariability of its context, the discourse of interrogatives in action may forever reside in murky waters. Discourse in action poses problems. To researchers willing to draw eclectically and pragmatically, when possible, from areas such as theoretical linguistics and theoretical semiotics, these problems can become challenges, in spite of the untidy milieu of the practice of discourse. (Fiordo 1989: 39)
I didn't get much out of this paper, but at least some of these expressions seem neat.

Fiordo, Richard 1991. Time-binding and Native people: A semiotic interpretation. Semiotica 84(3): 253-273.

General semanticists use the term time-binding to refer to our human capacity and activity of employing signs, language, and symbols to unite or reunite with ways and ideas from our human past. According to Lee (1941), time-binding marks our peculiar human feature. He explains that we can draw from the past in and through the present to prepare for the future. This is possible due to the power symbolization gives us. Through symbolization the skills and wisdom of civilization can be recorded and preserved. In short, our experience can be 'accumulated, worked over, magnified, and transmitted' (Lee 1941: 4). Through time-binding, the present adds something to the work of the past. With the present come 'new possibilities, new searchings, new ways of looking, new experimenting' (1941: 5). In other words, through time-binding, humanity improves and progresses from the past (Korzybski 1921: 186). We get by with a little help from our friends from the past - our ancestors. (Fiordo 1991: 253)
So, essentially what Rank (1984) calls "vertical bonding". Since I noticed "time-binding" in Ruesch & Bateson's table of levels of abstraction, I looked it up: both Irving Lee's Language Habits In Human Affairs (1941) and Alfred Korzybski's Manhood of Humanity (1921) are available on archive.org
To grasp this in a context of propaganda, Jacques Ellul's views on propaganda are enlightening. He argues that propaganda has a 'concern with effectiveness'. Effectiveness is the supreme law of propaganda: 'ineffective propaganda is no propaganda' (Ellul 1973: x). Goebells said we talk only to obtain a certain effect; F. C. Bartlett adds that propaganda does not aim at increasingly political understanding, but at obtaining results through action. And Lasswell held that war propaganda attempted to win with a minimum of physical damage. (Fiordo 1991: 254)
It would appear that propaganda has the same relationship to effectiveness that information has to news (e.g. information that is not news is no information). As to Goebbels's statement, it's about as misinformed as Boaz arguing that we talk only to exchange ideas. Both have a limited view of the functions of communication.
Dependence refers to an interpreter's desire to be receptive to and dependent on the physical and social environment. Dominance indicates an interpreter's desire to control the physical and social environment. And detachment refers to an interpreter's desire to stand aloof from a frequently overstimulating physical and social environment (Morris 1956: 36-37). Hopefully, this sketch of the methodology of interpretation will suffice. (Fiordo 1991: 257)
In this sense Ruesch's approach is aimed towards dependence.
This interpretation of our scarce harmony with the absolute is akin to what the 'Romans called intuitio which means the ability to look into the intangible source behind the tangible surface' (Winkler, in Morey 1970: 51). (Fiordo 1991: 261)
That's odd. Peirce (1868: 103; fn) writes that "the word intuitus first occurs as a technical term in St. Anselm's Monologium." - that is, around the year 1075. Wikipedia on the other hand says that the Latin term inteuri translates as "consider", and "intuit" is a middle English word, "to contemplate". Even Wiktionary says that intuitio is a Medieval Latin word meaning "a looing at, immediate cognition", from Latin intueri ("to look at, consider"). In effect, intuition is "looking into". The part about looking into the intangible source behind a tangible surface seems like St. Anselm's theological addition.
Signs prevail; semiotic seeds grow everywhere, and the semiotic harvest is abundant. (Fiordo 1991: 268)
This high-level abstraction seems like as good a place to end as any.

Meta-phatics (6)


For an index of other posts in this series, jump to the end of this post. This one reviews the following sources:

Lobinger, Katharina 2016. Photographs as things - photographs of things. A texto-material perspective on photo-sharing practices. Information, Communication & Society 19(4): 475-488.

Recent changes in visual communication refer to photography becoming 'networked' due to the prevalent practice of sharing photographs immediately after capture via instant messaging tools or social media applications. (Lobinger 2016: 475)
So, aside from phatic communion, among other types of communion we could basically also talk about "visual communion"?
In doing so, the paper argues for a transmedial, texto-material perspective that conceptualizes photographs as objects and texts, understanding them as doubly articulated artefacts. Three modes of photo sharing that strongly differ regarding the role of the shared photographic objects are discussed: (1) sharing photographs to talk about images, (2) sharing photographs to communicate visually and (3) phatic photo sharing. (Lobinger 2016: 475)
It would appear that Juri Lotman was actually several decades ahead of the curve with his textual approach to images (as "continuous" texts).
Photographic technology is inherently tied to sharing. Most people in contemporary highly mediatized societies carry their cell phone or smartphone with an integrated camera with them at all times and are thus able to take photographs in basically every moment of their lives (Hand, 2012). And as most current camera phones enable an immediate connection to online web communication, they have been characterized as 'networked' or 'social cameras' (Lister, 2013; Rubinstein & Sluis, 2008; Weilenmann, Hillman, & Jungselius, 2013). 'Networked photography' refers to the practice of sharing photographs immediately after capture in real-time, mobile visual communication, using, for example, instant messaging (IM) tools or social media applications. With the proliferation of networked photography photo sharing has become a pervasive routine communicative act. (Lobinger 2016: 475)
So does this amount to a phatic media culture? What else in our "highly mediatized society" is networked in this sense?
Since sharing represents the 'fundamental and constitutive activity' (John, 2013a, p. 167) on which the Web 20 is based, it has recently gained prominence in communication research. Thereby, the concept of sharping has become an increasingly broad keyword to describe a heterogeneous bundle of practices (e.g. John, 2013a; Wittel, 2011). In some cases, sharing refers to technically standardized (one-to-many) distribution or to the exchange of commodities; in other cases it describes communicative practices of creating and maintaining sociality (e.g. Grassmuck, 2012; John, 2013b; Wittel, 2011). (Lobinger 2016: 476)
I'd say that communicative practices and communzational activities (sharing) are interrelated, and one is more prone to share with people one communicates with. Not only is it etymologically sensible, but if communication is viewed in terms of "constitutive" practices (i.e. integration with group and society) then it becomes more apparent that it also involves sharing. "The breaking of silence, the communion of words is the first act to establishing links of fellowship, which is consummated only by the breaking of bread and the communion of food" (Malinowski 1946[1923]: 314).
According to practice theory, as outlined by Schatzki (1996) and Reckwitz (2002), a practice is
a routinized type of behavior which consists of several elements, interconnected to one another: forms of bodily activities, forms of mental activities, 'things' and their use, a background knowledge in the form of understanding, know-how, states of emotion and motivational knowledge. (Reckwitz, 2002, p. 249)
Practice theory highlights the significance of the tacit and unconscious layer of knowledge and its shared and collective symbolic structures. According to this conceptualization, a practice is always per se social, being conceptualized as a type of inter-individual behaviour, action and understanding that occurs in different situations in different points of time and is performed by different individuals (Reckwitz, 2002). (Lobinger 2016: 477)
Compare this to the practice theory laid out by Harkness (2015), and possibly the discussion on cultural techniques (in German Media Studies). There is a distinct taste of sociosemiotics to all this that needs to be investigated further.
Practice theory provides a fruitful framework for the study of sharing, as the concept of communication related to this paradigm is explicitly not based on the idea of transferring meanings from one individual to another, hence rejecting the transmission model of communication. Rather, practices already contain routinized, non-subjective ways of understanding that do not require further transmission or transfer. (Lobinger 2016: 477)
Another convergence with communization, this time with Ruesch's emphasis on common experience. Having similar life experiences fosters knowledge of "the way things are done".
With respect to practice theory, photo sharing is here understood as a form of communicative practice involving two or more individuals that includes the use of texto-material photographic artefacts for different purposes with the use of different media and ICTs. The term modes of photo sharing is thus used to foreground the different rules of the photographic object in sharing practices without linking the activity of photo sharing to individual media and ICTs. (Lobinger 2016: 478)
For a more general treatment of the online infrastructure of sharing, I'd prefer the term semiotic resources (introduced by van Leeuwen, if I'm not mistaken), so that sharing of intellectual property (academic publications, music, movies, etc.) could be considered.
Sharing photographs in order to talk about images - This first mode of sharing photographs has a long tradition in analogue photography. It became popular in times when the reproduction of photographs was still less usual and printed photographs were stored in albums and boxes. In photo-sharing situations the photographic object was thus not literally shared, in a sense of giving it - in part - away or of reproducing it. Instead photographs were shown to others, used as conversational resources in communicative practices and finally returned to the owner after sharing. Moreover, sharing analogue photographs usually came with a time gam between the moment of capture and the moment of sharing. (Lobinger 2016: 479)
This is the mode of photo sharing dealt with by Patricia Prieto Blanco with regard to family photographs hung in home entrances. Photographs are shown to others, or people depicted on the photographs, followed by discussion or invocation of previous experiences.
The family photograph, for example, was created and used for the preservation and the construction of family identity and memory. (Lobinger 2016: 479)
That's Blanco's phatic community construction alright.
The sharing of stories around images often happens in collocated settings. When sharing their photographs or recent travels with friends, people might prefer to select and show photographs in a non-predefined manner according to the course of the narration. In the course of the story to be narrated, certain personal photographs are chosen and used as 'anchors for storytelling' (Van House, 2009, p. 1082) and for illustrating and thus supporting the shared story that is created. However, the main meaningful object of sharing is the narrative accompanying the photographs while the photographs are used as a supporting conversational resource. (Lobinger 2016: 479-480)
In other words, photographs in this situation function as conversation pieces, though they can also be treated as "semiotic resources".
Communicating visually and sharing visual stories - The second mode of photo-sharing shifts the focus directly onto the contents and visual qualities of the shared photographs. In this mode, photographs are shared to communicate visually or, in other words, to share visual stories. People then share photographs in order to tell something with the photographs and to express themselves photographically, not with a narration built around the photographs. Photographic content with its special visual style and idiosyncrasies is thus the main object of sharing. Again, this mode is not restricted to the use of certain ICTs. Photographs can be shared with different technologies depending on, for example, the situational affordances, the various social uses of photography or the media preferences of the conversational partners. (Lobinger 2016: 480)
In other words, these are the types of galleries that tell a story without additional verbal information. For example, travel or holiday photographs tell stories of the "I went there and did that" ilk.
IN a non-media-centric, transmedial perspective on photo sharing, strict boundaries between 'virtual' and 'real' environments in the sense of online vs. offline sharing need to be avoided. In fact, the online and the offline visual presentation of identity are highly intertwined (e.g. Autenrieth, 2011; Schwarz, 2010) with complex implications for the negotiation of identity, particularly for teenagers and young adults. The shared photo albums on profile-based SNSs are important resources for maintaining the relationship with a personal network and for creating an authentic visual online and offline identity. In this regard, Autenrieth (2011) has found the aesthetic features of photographs to be less important than the photographs' authenticity, contents and communicative significance, that is, the attention paid to the posted photographs and the obtained likes and comments. (Lobinger 2016: 481)
In this sense photographs shared online constitute a kind of phatic resource for reifying and maintaining social relationships. Look at us, we're on a picture together, obviously we're friends. Just yesterday a Facebook friend had her birthday and her friend posted a greeting in the form of a photograph where they were both younger, the birthday child standing on the foreground with a silly bemused look and the greeting friend sitting awkwardly on the ground in the background.
Phatic photo sharing - The third mode of photo sharing, here called phatic photo sharing, refers to the fact that often neither the content of the pictures and their visual qualities nor the verbal narrations about photographs that were at the core of the two previously discussed modes of photo sharing are the dominant features of sharing, whereas the communicative significance, the pleasure of communication and connectivity of photo sharing comes to the fore. In this mode of photo sharing, photographs are exchanged mainly for the sake of visual connectivity and thus in order to confirm and strengthen bonds and relationships, for example by performing 'visual chitchat' or 'visual small-talk' (Villi, 2012). In some cases, the content of the exchanged photographs is rather irrelevant. Malinowski (1923) and Jakobson (1960) have referred to these meaningful acts of communication - that in most cases, however, do not convey meaningful content - as the phatic mode of communication (Manovich, 2009; Miller, 2008; Senft, 1995; Villi, 2012). (Lobinger 2016: 481)
Unlike Virilio's strictly Jakobsonian definition, this one combines it with Malinowskian phatic communion. It is especially noteworthy that the pleasure principle is mentioned, as I've only seen a few others take this aspect in Malinowski seriously.
People engaging in phatic photo sharing describe the photographs they typically exchange as gratuitous, useless photographs because the motifs of the photographs do not matter at all (Lobinger & Brantner, 2015). The photographs rather serve for keeping up a continuous flow of visual contact with friends. (Lobinger 2016: 482)
I sense a likeness with the phatic fountain (Robertson 2003).
Practices of phatic photo sharing bear a likeness to the tradition of the 'squillo' in Italy, that is, free telephone rings that were used to replace toll calls or paid SMS messages. A squillo is made to say 'thinking of you', 'have arrived safely' or 'call back'. Just as a photograph in phatic photo sharing, a squillo is thus mainly used for creating a feeling of closeness to a significant other and to enable the experience of relatedness (Knobel et al., 2012). (Lobinger 2016: 482)
This also exists in Estonia, where it is called vastakas (a slang for "unanswered call", effectively an "(un)answery"), meaning that you call but hang up before the other person answers the call.
Sharing phatic visual messages, for example, accentuates the social relationship between the conversational partners without further emphasis on the photograph's role for group memory. (Lobinger 2016: 484)
Synonyms, synonyms, synonyms.
As was discussed, besides sharing photographs as either lasting material or ephemeral objects, photo sharing can also assume forms of sharing as connecting or of visual communication, in the sense of sharing information and sharing as telling. With regard to the concept of sharing, this leads to the problem that sharing and communication are partly equalized. In some cases, we do not really share a picture, we communicate visually, just as we do not share words (signifiers) but tell meaningful stories (signified) when talking to someone. This challenges the notion of sharing that still lacks a precise conceptualization, particularly when the object to be shared is at the same time a medium for sharing symbolic content. (Lobinger 2016: 484)
What? Malinowski is referenced, but the point of phatic communion seems to have been missed.

Papacharissi, Zizi 2016. Affective publics and structures of storytelling: sentiment, events and mediality. Information, Communication & Society 19(3): 307-324.

In this essay, I further explicate the construct of affective publics by drawing elements from two case studies, the first focusing on uses of Twitter leading up to and following the events surrounding the resignation of Hosni Mubarak via #egypt, and the second one focusing on online iterations of the Occupy movement, and specifically #ows, one of the more connective and central tags of the movement. I explore what mediated feelings of connectedness do for politics and networked publics in the digital age, and explore their impact on structures of storytelling, sentiments, and the mediality of events broadcast through different platforms. Technologies network us, but it is our stories that connect us. (Papacharissi 2016: 307)
The keywords are commendable, but the overall effect has a "more hope and fanfare than actual results" feel to it, as Miller (2015) proves that in these kinds of transformative political events the actual impact of phatic technologies is negligible.
Even though the deal sets the terms for remaining within the Eurozone, the terms themselves reiterate, reinforce, and reproduce politics of austerity that have guided how the European Union has navigated the financial crisis of past few years. (Papacharissi 2016: 307)
I take a triadomanic likening to these terms. The quasi-marxist in me would subsume all of them under the term "perpetuation", but why have one word when you could have endless many.
[...] I am bothered by the casual use of the term coup d'état. I wonder: Have any of the people using the term had to live through a coup d'état? Yet, the term, used as an open signifier, draws support from a number of networked publics following the developments. (Papacharissi 2016: 308)
You mean a poly- or pansemic signifier?
I would extend this claim to argue that hashtags like #ThisIsACoup, but also #BringBackOurGirls, #IfTheyGunnedMeDown, #HandsUpDontShoot, #BlackLivesMatter, nad countless others are actually signifies not empty, but open to definition, redefinition, and re-appropriation. They serve as framing devices that allow crowds to be rendered into publics; networked publics that want to tell their story collaboratively and on their own terms. (Papacharissi 2016: 308)
More triadic spouting of terminology. This author seems to have a knack for it. A matter of preference, I guess.
These networked publics come together and/or disband around bonds of sentiment, and I describe them as affective, convening across networks that are discursively rendered out of mediated interactions (Papacharissi, 2014). They assemble around meida and platforms that invite affective attunement, support affective investment, and propagate affectively charged expressions, like Twitter. (Papacharissi 2016: 308)
I'm still on the fence about "sentiments" in Malinowski - he seems to contradict himself on the matter. "Affective attunement" on the other hand, is basically what La Barre's phatic communication is about.
My goal is to show the contemporary traction the concept of Affective Publics has, and expand on the days initially presented in the book, offering greater clarity and utility to the concept. Therefore, in this essay, I further explicate the construct of affective publics by drawing elements from two case studies [...] (Papacharissi 2016: 308)
My goal with "phatic studies" is similarly to introduce it to the "contemporary traction", though I'm unfamiliar with this phraseology. Rather, I would like phatic studies to gain traction. And since this paper, too, is a phatic study in this sense, I'd like to see how the "mediated [...] connectedness" here purported pans out in follow-up.
Researchers study how the platform is used in news breaking situations, in anticipation or premediation of events that are about to happen or are in the process of happening, thus further contributing to and cultivating a culture of instantaneity in news reporting. Premediation played a central part in how we conceptualized our research design and interpreted our findings. (Papacharissi 2016: 309)
Kekkek. This really reminds me of 4chan "happenings" and how they are "happening" exactly because they are premeditated and premediated - the persons behind the happening leaves a warning, commits the crime, and then - if possible - posts results. All in all it presents an awfully novel aspect to our current "mediated society" - our sociopaths also invite participation in their illegal and destructive activities.
Homophily further drives how people use Twitter, meaning that like-minded people tend to listen to like-minded others online (e.g., Weller, Bruns, Burgess, Mahrt, & Puschmann, 2013; Wu, Hofman, Mason, & Watts, 2011). (Papacharissi 2016: 309)
Much like hodology, this term - homophily - sounds simultaneously useful and superfluous. Can't put my finger on why exactly yet.
In conversations around controversial topics, replies between like-minded individuals tend to strengthen group identity, whereas replies between different-minded individuals reinforce in-group and out-group affiliation (Yardi & Boyd, 2010b). (Papacharissi 2016: 310)
Just like with homogeneous and heterogeneous sympathy in terms of emotional mimicry (Hess & Fischer 2013), the in/out, us/them, with/without etc. distinctions still seem relevant.
Thus, within the sphere of everyday political and social activities, online activity may connect disorganized crowds and enable the formation of networked publics around communities, actual and imagined (e.g., Howard & Hussain, 2013). These publics are activated and sustained by feelings of belonging and solidarity, however evanescent those feelings may be. (Papacharissi 2016: 310)
I like that these "affective publics" do not have to pertain to actual communities. The concept of "community" is problematic, in my opinion, because our post-social environment doesn't really foster classical communities (people who live together), but diffused communities of "like-minded people" who may be physically and even culturally very distinct and separated, but conjoined by a single arbitrary factor (I think E.R. Clay may have treated something like this in terms of sets, i.e. all men who have never climbed mount Everest or something to that effect - it might be worthwhile to look into what he actually wrote and see if it can't be turned around).
Driven by an ambient, self-sustaining mode of reflexivity, generated and re-generated by accumulating and imbricated digital layers of expression, affective traces persist and bind networked publics long after the initial events that called them into being. Dean explains that while affective attachments to media cannot produce communities, they may produce 'feelings of community' (p. 22). (Papacharissi 2016: 310)
Spot on. Also, on "traces" cf. Nozawa (2015), and consider whether Kockelman's (2010) "sieving and serendipity" could be included in the discussion of affective traces that bind networked publics.
Our interpretations are driven by an understanding of affect as a form of pre-emotive intensity subjectively experienced and connected to, in this context, to processes of premediation or anticipation of events prior to their occurrence. We drew from the work of Damasio (1994) and Tomkins (1995) to trace how affect provides and amplifies intensity by increasing our awareness of a certain mind or body state that we, as adults, learn to label as a particular feeling and express as a given emotion. Without affect, feelings essentially do not 'feel', for it is affect that provides the intensity with which we experience emotions like pain, joy, and love, and more important, the urgency to act upon those feelings (Damasio, 1994; Tomkins, 1995). (Papacharissi 2016: 311)
How does this compare to the linguistic exposition of Martin and White (2005), according to whom affect is language is "concerned with registering positive or negative feelings", i.e. almost like a value-judgment of emotions.
Because of its not yet element (Spinoza, in Seigworth & Gregg, 2010), affect contains anticipation, promise, hope, and potential, or, what Seigworth and Gregg term 'an inventory of shimmers' (p. 9). This liminality renders individuals powerful and potentially powerless at the same time because of its ephemeral and transient nature. (Papacharissi 2016: 311)
While the (previously mentioned) linguistic evaluation comes after the fact, affect itself here is reminiscent of Peirce's Firstness, which encompasses qualia, emotion, possibility, etc.
Affect is not emotion. It is the intensity with which we experience emotion. It is the slight tap on our foot when we hear a song but have not yet cognitively processed that we like it. It is the phatic nod we produce when we are listening along to what someone is saying, but we have not yet decided whether we fully agree or not. (Papacharissi 2016: 316)
Good analogies. The core argument seems to be that, much like Peirce's Firstness, affect has not yet developed into a token and cannot be attributed to a type.
(5) The streams sustain publics convened around affective commonalities - Impact is symbolic, agency calimed semantic, power liminal (Papacharissi 2016: 318)
c.o.m.m.u.n.i.z.a.t.i.o.n

van Es, Karin 2016. Social TV and the Participation Dilemma in NBC's The Voice. Television & New Media 17(2): 108-123.

[...] I identify a participation dilemma. This dilemma results from the fact that in giving viewers influence over aspects of the production to create an emotional investment, producers relinquish control over the contents of the show, which needs to appeal to large audiences. In addition, I classify the applications of social media: promotion, affective, functional, and phatic. (van Es 2016: 108)
These distinctions imply that the phatic is separate from promotion (which is not the case with Virilio's phatic image), or affect (not the case with La Barre's phatic communication) or functionality (not the case with phatic function in general). But I hope that these distinctions are nevertheless sensible and operational, and my own view of phatics is merely too broad.
Recently, the genre has proved particularly suited to what is colled "social TV": the combination of television with the real-time experience of social media (Ducheneaut et al. 2008). (van Es 2016: 108)
The pairing of social media, or networking, seems to have no limits. Above it's "networked photography", here it's "social TV". Soon enough we'll have social-networked everything.
I analyze how NBC fine-tuned its social media strategy over the course of these seasons, disclosing and subsequently reflecting on what I call the "participation dilemma": the clash between the promise of interactivity characteristic of reality singing competitions and some of the basic interests of television producers. To generate high ratings, producers must offer compelling television in the form of tightly structured narratives, but certain types of audience participation threaten their control over the program. As a result, viewers are invariably offered relatively superficial types of interaction that claim ostensibly to blur the line between producers and viewers - and by extension, to shift power to the audience - but in fact keep their roles distinct. Effectively, social media's potential is curbed: its use is molded to serve the interests of the television industry. (van Es 2016: 109)
In effect, the use of social media for politics or entertainment is beginning to look "appropriated" in the sense of maintaining the status quo rather than subverting it. It reminds me of Thomas Matthiesen's (1974) book about The Politics of Abolition, where he noted that honest co-operation with "the authorities" will inevitabli lead to "the road towards being integrated into or absorbed by the system we were trying to change" (original emphasis). That is, both politics and entertainment are seemingly integrating and absorbing social media as a transformational tool and neutering its potential for change. This might be a good point to revisit with more information and expand into a treatment. #absorption
Against the background of supposedly passive media consumption of "old" media, "new" media's interactivity promises to restructure the hierarchical relationship between senders and receivers, taking power away from the mass media and giving users greater control over mediated communication (Müller 2008b). (van Es 2016: 110)
Folly. Is it a threat or a promise? A rhetorical question, but perhaps a significant one to ask at this date and time: what if the restructuring of relationships between media producers and consumers is not so much a "possibility" but an "inevitability" that we're not yet realizing? What happens when media and entertainment organizations no longer simply cut back but really go under? What will be left? I want to paraphrase Orwell's sentence, "If there is hope, wrote Winston, it lies in the proles" and say that if there's any hope it's in the blogs, but at this point I'm not even sure if that's the case, or if adding (micro) to "blogs" would change anything.
Social TV stimulates viewers to watch programs while they air, as only then can they participate in on-air events, and this is the peak time for socializing with other viewers about the show (a Facebook post or a tweet the following day can seem like a reference to ancient history). At the same time, the rise of new information systems, including social media, introduces novel possibilities for the collection of audience data - and even for the collection of new kinds of information. More specifically, they allow the measurement of audience engagement: how people feel and respond to programming, rather than just what they are exposed to. (van Es 2016: 111)
This might explain why the relevant term is "affective media", not "cognitive media". It's all rather impulsive. You get "entrained" because of "emotional valence" (Fusaroli et al. 2015), but you don't have near enough relevant information in the heat of the moment, nor time to look up facts. Going on William James's (1890) definition of the intellect, i.e. involving the ability to delay gratification, I'd say that there's a more cognitive-ideational enjoyment of things that are "ancient history" (e.g. binge watching Breaking Bad after it has aired so that you can proceed quickly and familiarize yourself more objectively with the surrounding hype long after mass interest has waned away). I'm thinking of retroactive engagement, aren't I?
She proposes the terms reactive, active, and interactive to identify common ways of classifying the degree of user influence on production output. Respectively, these can be defined as low influence on the production process (as in quizzes and polls), accumulative influence on production (as in voting), and high influence on (parts of) the production (Enli 2012, 123-27). (van Es 2016: 112)
Useful distinctions. My blogging format is reactive, but a few years ago I sent a recommendation (which in itself is active, I guess) to academia.edu for them to create a sidebar for comments, like we have in MS Word (or already on some social media sites like Soundcloud), and they finally created it; I got to use it for the first time yesterday and it seems to amount to an interactive degree.
As for Twitter, viewer tweets were featured only during the live shows. During the blind auditions and battle rounds, only tweets exchanged between the coaches and the host - often in the vein of silly quarrels - were shown, in the bottom third of the screen. Gillar (2011, 234) has referred to this type of social media use, a form of overlay, where comments from the show's representatives but not the viewers are included on screen, as "promotion disguised as viewer interaction." (van Es 2016: 113)
What was Matthiesen's term again? Absorption.
Nonetheless, rather than allowing the audience vote alone to determine who moved forward in the competition, the show's three experts were given considerable voting power - and for a specific reason. As Mark Andreqevic (2001) has noted, in taking power sharing "too literally," viewers of Big Brother voted contestants home who had made the program more interesting (because they were phony or manipulative), so their decision was not in the best interests of the show. This relates directly to the participation dilemma: the need for producers to control their shows' content, making sure that what is broadcast will be attractive to a large audience. (van Es 2016: 116)
If the general population were to take a vote on which types of media it would espouse and ban, we'd probably end up in the world of Fahrenheit 451.
Looking across the reality singing competition spectrum in 2015, it is possible to discern four main, nonexclusive applications of social media in reality TV competitions, which I designate here as "promotional," "affective," "functional," and "phatic." (van Es 2016: 117)
Good term. Likewise, Roman Jakobson's speech functions are not really exclusive (since subordinate functions are always there in some measure), but I wonder if even the "dominant" - which is often used as an apology (even by me) in these situations, is really the right approach. "Salience" used in some other quarters at this point seems preferable because it implies that the particular function is salient for the investigator or situation of investigation.
Of course, social media are also being used to nurture and deepen the emotional investment of viewers. Such use relates to how, in light of increasing audience fragmentation and autonomy, the industry has been revaluing fan loyalty and participation (Jenkins 2006). Television networks, as mentioned, are increasingly interested in measuring audience engagement rather than their exposure to programming (Napoli 2011). In social TV, as opposed to transmedia storytelling, the emphasis is on audience participation in real time. The preferred form of user influence for an affective application of social media is active engagement, which tends to result in relations of extension (e.g., in the Twittersphere) and overlay (on screen). (van Es 2016: 118)
This reminds me of how the Daily Show (with Jon Trevor) now has a tumblr account with pre-fabricated gifs. That is, DS has extended to tumblr. Now that I think about it all makes sense - tumblr is by popular opinion the home of the most whiny and emotional pre- to malpubescent people; and DS is pandering exactly to that demographic. It really is the mouthpiece of the SJW movement.
These practices closely align with something long recognized in television studies, which Donald Horton and Richard Wohl (1956) described as the establishment of "para-social interaction." In mass media such as television and radio, the authors claim, the shows' representatives are encouraged to have direct contact with the audience, so as to make it feel as if the performers belonged to a circle of peers. By giving the audience a "direct line" to the performers, coaches, and host through Twitter, the frame separating it from the show is made to seem permeable, implying something of the intimacy of a face-to-face relationship. (van Es 2016: 118)
Holy shit! Could this be the source for elaborating my half-baked "parachannel" idea? Horton, Donald and Richard Wohl 1956. Mass Communication and Para-Social Interaction: Observations on Intimacy at a Distance. Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes 19(3): 215-229.
As Nick Couldry (2009, 109) points out, interactivity around content is a way of "showing, in performance, the otherwise merely assumed connection between medium and representative social group." Social media enhances this performance for television, by enbaling real-time interactivity around live content. (van Es 2016: 118)
In my half-baked channel theory, an observer or someone who happens to overhear the conversation from some distance is part of the meta-channel (Colin Cherry's concept), while someone talked about belongs to the para-channel. While quite useless for the study of face-to-face interactions, the para-channel is relevant for online conversations, especially ones stored for public access, because the person named can find the conversation and read up on what is said about him or her.
The final application of social media in television identified here can be called "phatic." Here, the primary function of social media is to keep communication channels open. This occurs in situations when viewers are asked to respond to questions simply to keep them involved, but without having them influence the narrative. These scenarios usually involve reactive forms of participation. (van Es 2016: 119)
This is how the Nightly Show uses Twitter. Each episode ends with some innocuous question or other to which the audience should respond.
In the future, television producers will probably continue to revive the promise of interactivity, and find new ways of incorporating viewers into their programs. However, I have suggested that although the industry usually relinquishes some control over the program narrative in the process, it simultaneously tends toward managing user participation to maintain its business model. It is to be expected that new technologies for participation will continue to be used in similar ways, and serve the industry by remediating successful practices from the past. In this case, also, actual opportunities for audiences to influence program content will remain an empty promise. We can thus only expect shifts in power between producers and viewers with the adoption of other business models: those not reliant on the selling of audiences to advertisers. (van Es 2016: 121)
Yup. This is exactly what I think. There will be opportunities for participating in media more in the future, but we have to first see old business models die.

Papadima, Aspasia and Evangelos Kourdis 2016. Global meets local: typographic practices and the semiotic role of subtitling in the creation of parodies in Cypriot dialect on Internet texts. Social Semiotics 26(1): 59-75.

The rapid growth of technology has led to the use of increasingly complex multimodal cultural texts aiming to transfer information to even larger masses, thus allowing researchers to develop the concept of mass culture. Mass culture is the culture addressing the mass and the wide public. It is woth noting that mass culture is not created by the masses but is industrially constructed to be consumed by the masses (Vasiliou and Stamatakis 1992, 237). One of the media for promoting mass culture is the Internet, whose impact is ever increasing. (Papadima & Kourdis 2016: 59)
Nah. This does not hold true for the internet. I'd rather stick to Ruesch's definition of mass culture, according to which it is a network characterized by the fact that anyone (in the wide public) can be the addressee, but the addresser is anonymous. The anonymous constructors of mass media messages in industry is just a special case of it. The internet offers counter-examples, including viral videos, memes, copypasta, etc.
Gonzálaz intentionally connects text type with translation. Today's global culture operates on a system of semiosis where the registers of communication are mixed: they are both pictorial and linguistic at the same time, they incorporate motion and have produced a whole new definition of text. (Papadima & Kourdis 2016: 60)
This seems to be in vogue. Papadima & Kourdis (2016, above) likewise argued "for a transmedial, texto-material perspective that conceptualizes photographs as objects and texts, understanding them as doubly articulated artefacts." Here, at least, Uspenski et al. 1973 are quoted.
So the question that arises in this case is which is the role of subtitling if it does not repeat the content of the audiovisual text? The answer to this question is related to the concept of recontextualization. As Androutsopolous (2010, 215) states:
[r]econtextualization involves the appropriation and the reworking of globally circulated media material into a local code for a local audience. In the case of spectacles, this involves the manipulation of different media and modes, intertextual tensions within popular culture, and heteroglossic contrasts of re-voicing and re-imaging.
Androutsopolous (2010) characterizes this phenomenon as a "local response to global media content". (Papadima & Kourdis 2016: 61)
Thus, recontextualization is the opposite of what is commonly understood as appropriation. A classical example would be the coke bottle in The Gods Must Be Crazy (1980).
In the same framework, code switching between worldwide hegemonic English and the local Cypriot dialect is not surprising, e.g. "One way ticket να μεν ιξανάρτουν" (one way ticket so that they will not come back). The use of Greeklish, Cyprenglish actually, is the finishing touch for the atmosphere of parody the third video under examination creates [...] (Papadima & Kourdis 2016: 63-64)
Add Cyprus to the long list of countries where young people speak a mixture of English and local language (i.e. Estonglish, Chinglish, etc.) (in phatic studies read during the last month or so I've found such remarks about Nepal, Arabic Countries, and there was maybe one more). It's a worldwide phenomenon, after all.
The medium where typography is projected, i.e. the screen, is a decisive factor. Paper reflects light depending on its colour and brightness, whereas the screen is self-illuminous and creates different dynamics in the relationship between text and reading surface. (Papadima & Kourdis 2016: 66)
Sel-luminous. I like that. In my own short stories (which I wrote in my youth), the walls, ceilings and floors of built environments were self-luminous for the most part. In my current fantasies they still are. // Maybe relevant conceptualizing Joe's phatic "focus". Specifically, how television and other self-luminous screens capture attention.
For Archakis and Tsakona (2012, 79) "[...] humor is a decisive factor for integration in a group, since it brings to the surface the more or less latent values and the explicit or implicit norms of the group". It is a fact that the mother tongue is a medium to express values, perhaps the most important one. Besides, in which other language could someone express oneself about everyday topics, such as sports and politics in a humourous manner if not in one's mother tongue? (Papadima & Kourdis 2016: 69)
Something phatic. Also, compare this to Mühlhäusler's (2016) understanding of the death of a "phatic" language.

Ballantyne, Anne; Victoria Wibeck and Tina-Simone Neset 2016. Images of climate change - a pilot study of young people's perceptions of ICT-based climate visualization. Climatic Change 134(1): 73-85.

The role of the public in responding to the challenges of climate change is increasingly being emphasized in climate science and policy debates (Joffe and Smith 2013). In particular, it has been argued that the public can contribute to climate change mitigating through lifestyle changes and "green consumerism", or through exercising political influence by supporting climate-friendly policies (e.g. Whitemarsh et al. 2013; Lowe et al. 2006). A key concept in these debates is "public engagement", which refers to the active participation of the public in learning and action addressing climate change (Wolf and Moser 2011). (Ballantyne, Wibeck & Neset 2016: 73-74)
Above it was hypothesized that public engagement may not be as opportune at current stage of our social-networking development to be as affective in effecting transformative politics as we'd like it to be. Hopefully this paper will offer a more positive outlook.
[...] this paper takes its point of departure in a semiotic framework that "is interested in how things come to gain meaning for individuals, and how these meanings are a product of the cultures and worldviews from where they originate" (O'Neill and Hulme 2009: 403). (Ballantyne, Wibeck & Neset 2016: 74)
Not a lot could be hoped from a semiotic theory that takes "meaning" to be its primary operative term. "Throwing putty" is what Charles Morris called it.
The focus of this study is on how messages come to gain meaning for members of a target audience. Theories of semiotics provide a framework for understanding how systems of meaning employed in visual communication are communicated and interpreted. Additionally, it "can contribute to a more complete understanding of how communictaion in general operates" by emphasising the meaning perspective in the context of visual communication (Moriarty 1996: 186). The relationship between signs and meaning is a fundamental aspect of communication theory and it provides a framework for understanding interpretation as a core facet of communication, by accentuating the active role of the audience (Fiske 2011). (Ballantyne, Wibeck & Neset 2016: 75-76)
I know of systems of signs, but systems of meaning?
In particular, our analysis identified three interrelated sub-categories all relating to "concretization", namely making complexity visible, clarifying and/or providing an overview, and making climate change tangible. (Ballantyne, Wibeck & Neset 2016: 80)
Since concretization (metaphorically, borrowing from Gilbert Simondon) is also a theme in our meta-analysis of phatics, these four aspects might be well to keep in mind.
Contemplating the semiotic approach to communication, it is not surprising that interpretations are influenced by existing knowledge. As such, this situates climate change communication in a theoretical context that holds interpretation and meaning as principal elements influenced by contextual factors. To investigate the effects of communicative efforts, these factors, i.e. social context, prior knowledge and levels of interpretations, need to be considered as part of the communication process and be embedded in the methodological design of climate change communication studies. (Ballantyne, Wibeck & Neset 2016: 84)
Buzzwords buzz, but do little more.

Ledin, Per and David Machin 2016. A discourse-design approach to multimodality: the visual communication of neoliberal management discourse. Social Semiotics 26(1): 1-18.

Our sense of design here draws on Kress's (2010, 6) notion of this being the way that individuals and institutions realize their interests in the world. A designer (an individual or an institution) uses certain available semiotic resources that are apt to serve certain purposes. Such purposes are in a sense "built in" to semiotic resources, since they have historically evolved potentials for meaning-making, what is called their affordances. Due to their affordances semiotic modes such as photography, graphics, layout, colour, numbers and writing will be deployed and co-articulated. (Ledin & Machin 2016: 1)
This kinda sounds like hodology. (I really should look into it.)
We show how a pervasive management discourse is communicated through a principled design, and takes over the control of work practices. The discourse is about neoliberal ideas of how to make the running of public institutions more efficient, how to improve customer relations and market success, how to implement and use steering systems that ensure accountability and higher productivity. (Ledin & Machin 2016: 2)
Phraseology. Might be useful for my planned analysis of Anomalisa, and the discourse on customer relations in it.
Research in multimodality has pointed to the increasingly promotional character of communication in the universities. In prospectuses and on websites we find uses of colour, photographs and space that resemble commercial brochures (Teo 2007) and readers are addressed in a casual but trendy voice. Photographs are intended to create more personal feeling, oriented to presenting students as customers who will acquire a degree, where university is more of a "lifestyle", rather than about study and learning (Zhang and O'Halloran 2013). (Ledin & Machin 2016: 2)
"It is not about creating an intellectual space! It is not! Do you understand that? It's about creating a home here!" screeches the Yale student at her campus administrator.
These networks are seen as based on three metafunctions underlying semiosis. Semiotic modes (connected systems of resources) are simultaneously used to say something about the world (the ideational metafunction), to signal our relationships (the interpersonal metafunction) and marshal these into a structured whole (the textual metafunction) (Halliday and Hasan 1985, ch. 2). (Ledin & Machin 2016: 3-4)
Damn Halliday! The referential function is the first and primary function of semiosis, along with emotive and conative, or "affective" and "energetic" in Peircean terms. The relational (phatic) function is a metafunction, though. And I don't even know what the textual function is about - the marshalling of semiotic material into hierarchically increasing structural wholes is not even a function, it's a baseline for any kind of semiotic activity.
Voloshinov (1973) viewed that all signs embodied the ideology of their time. Here we want to show how we can take steps to draw out this ideology by drawing on the concept of discourse and how this has been approached through one particular notion in critical discourse analysis. (Ledin & Machin 2016: 5)
Just in the preceding paragraphs you say that "Semiotic phenomena must never be studied in abstract or in an unhistorical manner but as they are situated and material". And now you come out with this blanket statement that, although attributed to an authority, is is nevertheless as abstract and unhistorical as it gets. I've seen similar pronouncements before, and they almost never provide evidence. It may also have to do something with the fact that "ideology" is such a vague notion. But whatever, for sake of Nozawa's "ideology of phaticity" (2015), I'll roll with it.
We begin with a promotional brochure published in 2012. It is written in English, which signals the university's international ambitions. (Ledin & Machin 2016: 6)
Aren't "international ambitions" good?
If we look closer at the listed strategies we find that it is never stated who will carry out which activity. This is achieved through another linguistic device observed by critical linguists called nominalizations. This is when processes are presented as things. So for example, "collaborate", the verb process, becomes the noun "collaboration". It has been shown that this can be used strategically, precisely to avoid stating who did what and when since the use of the verbs requires that we include such details whereas the noun does not. The typical example is "there were attacks on the village", which omits who carried out the attacks and how these were carried out. (Ledin & Machin 2016: 11)
Now this I find interesting, if not only because I did something similar today when writing a few paragraphs about various subjects, and borrowing some verbs from a paper somewhere above.

Gaspar, Rui; Cláudia Pedro, Panos Panagiotopoulos and Beate Seibt 2016. Beyond positive or negative: Qualitative sentiment analysis of social media reactions to unexpected stressful events. Computers in Human Behavior 56: 179-191.

This paper argues that, alongside assessment of the affective valence of social media content as negative or positive, there is a need for a deeper uderstanding of the context in which reactions are expressed and the specific functions that users' emotional states may reflect. (Gaspar et al. 2016: 179)
This veers towards the understanding of affect as evaluative (e.g. the linguistic version in Martin and White 2005; cf. Ho 2013).
Reactions during these events can evidence collective sense-making (Gilles et al., 2013), supportive actions (Murthy, 2013; Panagiotopolous, Bigdeli, & Sams, 2014), social sharing of emotions and empatic concerns for affected individuals (Neubaum, Rösner, Rosenthal-von der Pütten, & Krämer, 2014) and individual strategies of approach/avoidance (Jonas et al., 2014), that would be less prevalent in non stressful situations with lower demands to cope with. (Gaspar et al. 2016: 179-180)
Something along the lines of La Barre's phatic communication, but on a macro scale.
This type of assessment requires a deeper understanding of people's affective expressions on social media and the context in which people express sentiment and other cognitive and behavioural manifestations while events unfold. (Gaspar et al. 2016: 180)
So a deeper understanding of online phatic communion? Emphasis on the context of situation.
Quantitative sentiment analysis methods can be relevant for all types of analyses that focus on what Steth, Purohit, Jadhav, Kapanipathi and Chen (2010, p.1) refer to as "event-centric user generated content on social networks". (Gaspar et al. 2016: 180)
Good jargon is good. It seems to amount to an object-based para-social interaction, where the object is an event.
Social media channels present themselves as a rich source of expressions of coping with demands. Twitter in particular can be considered a good source of affective expressions due to the quick, spontaneous and affective reactions found there, thus allowing access to the "time course of emotional responses to crises" (Spence, Nelson, & Lachlan, 2010, p.13). (Gaspar et al. 2016: 181)
Consequence of connected presence.
Social media messages produced during the time period of extraction, went through a filtering process to reduce the set to include only specific types. This was based on the Burgess and Bruns (2012) classification of types of tweets as: 1) original tweets - tweets which are neither @reply nor retweet; 2) retweets - tweets which contain RT @user... (or similar); 3) unedited retweets - retweets which start with RT @user...; 4) edited retweets - retweets do not start with RT @user...; 5) genuine @replies - tweets which contain @user, but are not retweets; 6) URL sharing - tweets which contain URLs. (Gaspar et al. 2016: 182)
This kind of scholarship seems to have made some real headway in terms of classification, at least. (I was similarly surprised at the clear-cut boundaries in academia between viral videos and memes.)
Two categories in which a diversity of affective expressions were found, were Self-confidence and Support seeking, either in the form of self-soothing or seeking reassurance from others to become more confident, respectively. (Gaspar et al. 2016: 183)
This amounts to a type of affirmation (in the sense of offering/requesting emotional support or encouragement).
Another example of positive affect was the expression of "concern for others". Widespread concerns and worries are often seen as something negative. However, although concern for the self may imply negativity, concern for others is a rather positive action. It helps to protect and increase available social resources such that one can draw on them to implement other ways of coping. This point is also true for tweeting in general: the act of sharing ones concerns ad coping efforts with others helps to form, strengthen and maintain social relationships (see Neubaum et al., 2014), which in turn can have various functions for one's coping efforts: having others as audience, encouragement, informational and practical resources, and finding comfort, agreement, confirmation and emotional support (see also Rimé, 2007). (Gaspar et al. 2016: 186)
Yet even sharing "concern for others" has an ego-centric component. Or in the words of comedian Anthony Jeselnik: "Don't forget how sads I am."
Under this scenario, we move from biological contamination to "psychological contamination", within and between all components of the social system (individuals, groups, organizations, societies). (Gaspar et al. 2016: 189)
Organizations or institutions constitute a level of abstraction missing from Ruesch's scheme.
Evaluations of the handling of the crisis and lessons for the future might even become part of individuals' expressions, hence fostering openness and learning that might not be possible using automated sentiment classification methods. (Gaspar et al. 2016: 189)
Exactly the work put forth by the next paper.
In our view, this contribution makes clearer the importance of future work in human-based qualitative analysis of social media content ad of psychos social media analysis approaches such as this, in general. (Gaspar et al. 2016: 190)
Yeap, this and next paper deal in fact with psychosocial media analysis.

Fersini, E.; E. Messina and F. A Pozzi 2016. Expressive signals in social media languages to improve polarity detection. Information Processing & Management 52(1): 20-35.

The goal of sentiment analysis is to define automatic tools able to extract subjective information, such as opinions and sentiments from natural language texts, in order to create structured and actionable knowledge to be used by either a decision support system or a decision maker. (Fersini, Messina & Pozzi 2016: 20)
A Social Sentiment Coding System?
This issue is usually addressed at document level (Yessenalina et al., 2010), in which the naive assumption is that each document expresses an overall sentiment. When dealing with social media contents coming from microblogs (like Facebook and Twitter), a lower granularity level could be more useful and informative (Jagtap and Pawar, 2013; Zhang et al., 2011). This new kind of virtual communication has led to new types of contents and diffusion models that need to be modeled explicitly starting from the language. (Fersini, Messina & Pozzi 2016: 20)
First time seeing "granularity" outside of that computer networks journal.
Inspired by the wide availability of emotional signals in social media and the promising results obtained by our previous contribution (Pozzi, Fersini, Messina and Blanc, 2013), in this paper we investigate the contribution of the most used expressive signals. (Fersini, Messina & Pozzi 2016: 21)
A F F E C T I V E . M E D I A
In our investigation, Twitter has been exploited thanks to its availability of data that are public by default: the percentage of public profiles available in Twitter is much higher than other social media. For example, in 2012, just over 11% of Twitter users were using the private profiles, compared to over 53% of Facebook (Dey et al., 2012). This turns Twitter into a gold mine of free data. (Fersini, Messina & Pozzi 2016: 21)
This is also why critics like Vincent Miller hypothesized that Twitter may actually be a marketing tool, or a tool of marketers.
Unlike well-formed documents (e.g., reviews), the writing style and the lexicon of microblogging messages are widely varied. Moreover, messages are often highly ungrammatical, and filled with spelling errors. As reported in Eisenstein (2013), the non-standard spelling on the social media is mainly due to the fast writing of the users, length limits of messages in online microblogs and finally the spread of common illiteracies until they become "the norm". (Fersini, Messina & Pozzi 2016: 22-23)
An aspect of conventionalization. This is most apparent in "lol" becoming "kek".
Sharing symbols elimination: most of the social media provide specific tools that allow users to share as much as possible their messages (e.g., Hashtags, Mention and Retweet on Twitter). Analogously to URLs, all the symbols related to the sharing tools have been removed because ineffective with respect to polarity detection; (Fersini, Messina & Pozzi 2016: 23)
Something for the bric-a-brac section. Jagamissümbolid.
These encouraging results suggest that not only words play an important role in sentiment classification on social media, but also that a mixture of expressive signals can significantly contribute to better discriminate between positive and negative opinions. (Fersini, Messina & Pozzi 2016: 30)
In other words, there are nonverbal features in textual material that are relevant for "polarity classification" or affective evaluation.

Kampf, Zohar 2016. All the Best! Performing solidarity in political discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 93: 47-60.

Maintaining, affirming, and re-establishing good relationships with others in political discourse by communicating involvement and concern are important for securing cooperation and acquiring power. (Kampf 2016: 47)
A nice Malinowskian variation on Jakobson's channel operations (or Ruesch's overall effects of social techniques). The topic reminds me of the recent instance of Donald Trump receiving vocal support from Sarah Palin, probably in the hopes of gaining the evangelical Christian vote.
This story, constructed around an act of seasonal greeting, exemplifies in shining colors the power of a group of speech acts - treated in this paper as solidarity-enhancing devices - to re-establish channels of peaceful communication in political discourse. Even if greeting and wishing were only an excuse for Netanyahu to initiate a conversation in a situation which is characterized by non-communication, it is only through the reconciliatory force of concern, folded into the performance of the speech acts, that the exchange of hopes for a peaceful future between the two peoples could be made further in the conversation. (Kampf 2016: 47)
Solidarity-enhancing devices complement attention-getting devices pretty well. One could wonder if La Barre's phatic communication could also be summed up in something like "support-seeking devices".
While it is common practice in some branches of critical study of political discourse to conflate conflict with power (Wilson, 2001), in other traditions of discourse analysis, especially in linguistic politeness, politics entails the "greasing" of human relationships (Chilton, 1990; Blum-Kulka, 1992). In the latter case, political behavior is reflexively designed so as to maintain rapport and achieve cooperation with others in order to acquire and enact political power (and not necessarily ta acquire power and domination over others). (Kampf 2016: 48)
A nice amalgamation of the "social lubricant" idiom and the Foucaultian positive concept of power.
Establishing sociability and cooperation with others can be achieved by performing solidarity in language. Solidarity - the manifestation of involvement and concern (Scollon et al., 2011) - underlines what interlocutors have in common ad is enacted by positive politeness strategies such as sharing the same concerns with a hearer, expressing a compatible stance, or showing appreciation for others' character and achievements (Brown and Levinson, 1987). (Kampf 2016: 48)
Thus, solidarity can be reinterpreted in terms of Ruesch's communization. I like that "solidarity in language" is part of it, because Malinowskian propitiation can play into it.
Common to the uses of these speech act verbs is the discursive construction of solidarity by either signaling the pleasure of a speaker in light of a gladdening event (which happened to the hearer in the past or the present) or expressing the hope that such an event will happen to the hearer in the future. (Kampf 2016: 48)
Thus, even greetings are underlined by the pleasure principle, which is not altogether groundbreaking an assertion, but does tie Malinowski's phatic communion and Jakobson's phatic function together in a novel way. (Or did John Laver already bring this out?)
Their dissemination by journalists across political communities allows individuals and communities to monitor actors' emotional and moral stance vis-à-vis acts, events, or other actors in the public arena. (Kampf 2016: 49)
Could this be the "actionable knowledge" that the psychosocial media analysis (above) is after?
(Kampf 2016: 51)
Goddayum. There's so much phaticity in this table that I can't even begin to analyze it. I will have to return to this when I have finished my paper on "Phatics, phaticity, and phatic studies" and pick this apart. Let me just say that it's refreshing to see a past-present-future orientation scheme used this way (aside from Peirce, Jakobson, and Laver this is a relatively infrequent operation).
Greeting and welcoming are acts that presuppose spatial and temporal sameness. They are expressive speech acts that convey the speaker's pleasure at the presence or arrival of others in or to the same place (Wierzbicka, 1987). In temporal terms, while congratulating and other supportive acts are post actions, directed at past occurrences, greetings and welcoming others are present-oriented actions, although they may [be] accompanied by future-oriented actions such as wishing the best. (Kampf 2016: 55)
Good points all around. It might be neat to compare, contrast, and seek continuities in Peirce, Jakobson, Laver, and this.
They serve as solidarity-enhancing devices because they acknowledge the sovereignty of individuals and groups with whom the speaker communicates (Duranti, 1997), assert discursive equality, and establish trust (Young, 2000) - all of which are necessary moral conditions for reaffirming, reinforcing, or re-establishing social relationships (Papson, 1986). (Kampf 2016: 55-56)
Synonymorium. Why not "reiterating, reinforcing and reproducing"? Realizing now that such representations register reactive or retrospective relations, and reiteration and reproduction refer to renditions.
It may be somewhat odd to find that 22 cases (4%) religious authoroties, mostly certified rabbis, blessed public figures before a variety of occasions such as medical procedures, election campaigns, and accession to high ranking positions. In a country such as Israel which has no separation between religion and state, being blessed by a religious figure has become a regular political ritual which may be perceived as a strategy for connecting with audiences of faith. (Kampf 2016: 57)
Phatic techniques on the group, organization, or society level.

Smith, Benjamin 2016. Turning language socialization ontological: Material things and the semiotics of scaling time in Peruvian Aymara boyhood. Language and Communication 46: 42-50.

This article develops an approach to semiotically mediated processes of socialization that can make sense of the agency that non-humans - especially material things - wield in socialization. (Smith 2016: 42)
Not bad. That is, not redundant, like "semiotic communication". A non-semiotically mediated process of socialization is held as a possibility even by Charles Morris, who held that communization can occur "by signs or other means" leaving those other means open to interpretation.
Answering this last question provides the opportunity to expand the theoretical reach of scholars interested in the timescale of socialization, praticularly scholars of language socialization. Language socialization researchers have, to great effect, shown how language usage serves as both a medium for socialization as well as its object (i.e., socialization occurs both through language and to use language [Ochs, 1986:2]). (Smith 2016: 42)
The underlying assumption being that language use is a pleasurable activity in itself. Socialization has a definite place in phatic studies.
The promise of an analysis of marbles is that it extends this concern in a new direction. Although the things that make up a marbles playing field are, to be sure, media or modalities of a specific (non-linguistic) sort, they also act as semiotic agents within processes of entextualization or discursive positioning, processes that are implicated in socialization. Making sense of the semiotic agency of material things in socialization - or, really, the agency of non-humans more generally - opens onto a new line of inquiry for scholars of language socialization. (Smith 2016: 43)
Partly concerned with what we call "transcommunication" (and also not unrelated to a variant of para-social interaction), although our interest is more technical, in computer-mediated communication itself as a semiotic agent (given the possibility of Google's artificial intelligence ultimately becoming the mediator between technologically communicating humans). In other words, it is not out of the question that the future of sociolinguistic socialization may consist of interactions with the conscious medium, a hyper-intelligent "Siri" who "concretizes" (in Simondon's sense) the search engine, teacher, friend, etc.
The Aymara variety of marbles requires a further extension: it poses the problem of how to theorize the communicative role of material things in socialization. In the Aymara version of marbles, it is the marbles playing field that, in concert with a wider range of human and non-human actors, helps to bring about processes of socialization into masculinity and the human. And, it does so as a semiotic or communicative agent (and is recognized as such): ultimately, it is rocks and twigs that select for boys of a certain sort, and it is boys who, indeed, respond to them in both linguistic and non-linguistic ways. How, then, can material things - and non-human agents more broadly - be understood as, indeed, semiotic agents in socialization, agents comparable in some way to parents, peers, and siblings? (Smith 2016: 43)
All this is extremely fascinating, excluding the emphasis on masculinity and humanness. With "transcommunication" we are facing similar theoretical problems, though with artificial intelligence instead marbles.
These two questions are motivated by concerns that are, in the contemporary sociocultural idiom, "ontological." That is a movement that is diverse in its theoretical concerns, being primarily linked to the relatively divergent agendas of scholars like Bruno Latour (2005, Eduardo Viveiros de Castro (2014), and Philippe Descola (2013). It is well beyond the goals of the current work to give an account of this line of scholarship. From a semiotic or linguistic anthropological perspective, the primary utility of this work - and, indeed, the one that inspires the current piece - is its attempt to broaden the range of entities that can be considered agents within human worlds. As these scholars (and others) have theorized the agency of entities like speed bumps, door openers, human-like jaguars, dogs, etc., they have developed a set of theoretical terms that allow for the agency of non-humans to be legible to anthropological analysis. Of special utility for the current analysis is the critical attention these scholars have given to the category "human" itself. They have, in divergent ways, shown that the category "human" is not easily discernable through traditional diacritics like society, culture, language, and self (e.g., see Kohn, 2008), 2013), a line of inquiry that allows for a rejuvenated concern for the study of the emergence of human-ness across processes of socialization. (Smith 2016: 43-44)
Cool. I've read one paper by Latour which I didn't like very much because it obfuscated linguistic functions. But I downloaded some by de Castro and Descola, which I'll hopefully get to read sometime this year.
Kockelman's attempt to formulate a general theory of meaning (2010, 2011, 2013), for example, has yielded an array of concepts that help to theorize relatively non-human forms of semiosis (so much so that it is beyond the scope of this essay to review them): e.g., processes of sieving and serendipity, the semiosis of channels, and the derived semiotic agency of machines, among others. (Smith 2016: 44)
Yup. I've also read one paper by Kockelman, and it too, did very little for me, although I do have several of his papers in my current readings list, and I was planning to re-read some of the phatic studies I read in fall 2014. So I might do a "Kockelman day".
In the first, longer section of the paper, I give an account of the semiotic agency of the marbles playing field, a task that requires me to draw on the Peircean-inflicted tradition of linguistic anthropology. (Smith 2016: 44)
Ground control to major kek. Peirceanism is an infliction, i.e. something unpleasant or painful, a nuisance.
To put it in a semiotic or informational idiom, finding and making an appropriate marbles playing field is an act that creates a network of channels or media through which a marble can pass (c.f. Kockelman, 2010; Shannon, 1948). It is an act of phatic labor, in Elyachar's sense (2010). More mundanely, it is a task of finding a field in which there are number of possible channels through which the sort of thing that is a marble can be struck towards a series of holes dug about four feet apart from one another. It must be a field in which not all possible channels are available, but certainly a majority of possible ones must be open or available. (Smith 2016: 45)
This is indeed idiomatic, because the "channel" here is metaphorical. It would maybe make sense in Kockelman's framework, but I'm pretty sure that it does not constitute phatic infrastructure in Elyachar's sense. (BTW while taking a smoke break I thought of expanding her theory in a totalising way, so that I may end up writing a paper "On Phatic Superstructure".)
Creating this network of channels requires one to pay attention to the interdiscursive or, better, intermaterial relationship between material things. In the first instance, the playing field is not just a single thing or object. It is a relationship between an indefinite number of things. The things that together comprise some field - twigs, rocks, clumps of grass, debris, plastic bottles, small inclines and declines, etc. - must be orchestrated in such a way that a sufficient number of channels remain open for marbles to traverse their paths. Implicit to this observation is another intermaterial relationship. These indefinite number of things only comprise a "playing field" relative to the sort of thing that a marble is and the sorts of things that a marble can do. (Smith 2016: 45)
We stumble upon hodology. This discussion, I think, could still be employed - at least metaphorically, if need be - to elaborate our transcommunication theory in the sense that if or when an artificial intelligence does become like a parent, peer, or sibling, it raises questions about the socially regulative role of that semiotic agency - what kinds of paths it might draw for us to traverse.
It is not just, in Kockelman's sense (2013), a sieve that keeps certain things from passing and holding up other things. It is, in an informational sense, a channel designed to introduce noise. Or, to put it in a more fully semiotic or interactional idiom, it is a channel populated with what Serres (1982) refers to as parasites. Relative to the sort of sign that a rolling marble (i.e., a sign of direction, skill, and strategy), twigs and rocks and bottles are things that perturb, create disorder, and undo intention - they act as parasites with respect to a marble and its intended target. (Smith 2016: 46)
Mention of Serres' parasites might contribute to why I can't help but think of transcommunication while reading this. In "a channel designed to introduce noise" it would be productive to consider noise - as Jurgen Ruesch does - as metacommunication, which would indeed be the primary function of the kind of "parasite" we envisage (a self-conscious channel that communicates about itself, in a sense, but also about codification of content, and possibly about all factors and functions of communication). (BTW if it communicated not only about factors but about functions, that would be a mark of distinction in terms of self-consciousness, because it's yet a more higher metalevel, one which a game of marbles does not reach, for example, partly because functions and communicating about functions is active, while communication about factors is a passive form of commentary.)
The larger issue at stake here is what Latour (2005) refers to as the relative incommensurability of human and non-human worlds. In his account, the agency of objects is - outside of exceptional circumstances like the breakdown of an object - assumed to be relatively discontunious with human forms of agency. For example, a brick that "supports" another brick does so on a timescale longer than conversations, marriages, collages, etc. (Smith 2016: 47)
An artificial intelligence on the other hand poses incommensurability in the reverse temporal perspective: its processing capabilities would make our human-scale conversations seem like the lifetime of a brick for it. Care should be taken that we don't end up with "absentminded" artificial conversation partners who know what we're going to say long before we know it ourselves.
When Marco threatened to kick one of Alberto's marbles, however, both of his siblings started to pay attention and threw Marco to the ground. In acting this way, Marco assumed a socioculturally recognized stance of a lisu child, a stance or position thought to characterize toddlers independent of gender: he was disobedient, mischievous, cheeky, and was doing only what he pleased. In relationship to marbles play, Marco was, if you will, a breaker of worlds. If Alberto works to create and defend the material/semiotic conditions of possibility for marbles play, Marco, in a mostly indiscriminate and unknowing way, sought to upend those conditions. He is an upender, an undoer of human doings, and, in the context of marbles, an undoer of the things that males regularly set out to do. (Smith 2016: 48)
This is just beautifully written. On the whole, this paper is a pleasure to read. Some anthropologists somehow do manage to smuggle literary value into their writings.

See also: